The Additional Chief Secretary To ... vs M. Balasubramanian on 8 August, 2022
7. The petitioner herein had completed one full
year service as on 30.06.2013, but the increment fell due
on 01.07.2013, on which date he was not in service. In
view of the above judgment of this Court, naturally he
has to be treated as having completed one full year of
service, though the date of increment falls on the next
day of his retirement. Applying the said judgment to the
present case, the writ petition is allowed and the
impugned order passed by the first respondent-Tribunal
dated 21.03.2017 is quashed. The petitioner shall be
given one notional increment for the period from
01.07.2012 to 30.06.2013, as he has completed one full
year of service, though his increment fell on 01.07.2013,
for the purpose of pensionary benefits and not for any
other purpose. No costs."