The State acts as a model employer that can’t discriminate among its employees and give a benefit that is conferred under the applicable rules/instructions to some, and deny the same to others.
The Kerala High Court clarified that the authorities erroneously granted the said increment in terms of Government Order while being careless and negligent, and that the respondent could not be faulted at all for their negligence.
Supreme Court held that, “the entitlement to receive increment therefore crystallises when the government servant completes requisite length of service with good conduct and becomes payable on the succeeding day.”
Supreme Court: Reversing the concurrent findings of the Single Judge and Division Bench of Kerala High Court, the Bench of S. Abdul
Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Division Bench of Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Jyotsna Rewal Dua, JJ., dismissing the present claim against the
Allahabad High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Mithlesh Kumar Tiwari, J. while allowing a petition quashed the impugned order whereby
Patna High Court: The petition challenging the order of reduction in pay scale and stopping of increment was allowed by a Single
Supreme Court: The Bench of J. Chelameswar and Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ directed the States to implement the recommendations of the Commission