Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2 (0.27 seconds)K.T. Plantation Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs State Of Karnataka on 9 August, 2011
NC: 2024:KHC:49881-DB
WP No. 25146 of 2023
B. Sub-clause (ii) of Para 3 makes the constraints
applicable promotion as being applicable to the grant of
Stagnation Increment, is true. However, the petitioner has
been promoted to the next cadre vide Notification dated
24.08.2013 and in that, his name figures at Sl.No.1. If
that be so, we fail to understand how constraint of the
kind would have come in the way of Government
according stagnation increment to the petitioner who is in
the evening of life, post retirement. Right to Increment,
whichever it be has property character and therefore, will
enjoy protection under Article 300A of the Constitution of
India in the light of the expansive discussion one finds in
K.T.PLANTATION PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER
VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA1. Once that right is created
by the Governmental Instruments, which have statutory
flavour, the exercise or right cannot be defeated de hors
the provisions thereof. We repeat, once promotion having
been granted post penalty order, the stagnation increment
1
AIR 2011 SC 3430
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:49881-DB
WP No. 25146 of 2023
could not have been denied to the civil servant, for the
stagnation period.
1