Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, nine Lower Division Clerks working in the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Mumbai, filed a writ petition challenging the denial of annual increment which fell due on 1st January of the following year. The petitioners had proceeded on Leave Without Allowance (LWA) for various periods during the preceding year, and some were on probation. The respondents, Union of India and ITAT authorities, denied the increment on the ground that the petitioners were not in service on the date the increment fell due (1st January) because they were on LWA or probation. The court examined the relevant rules, including Rule 9(6) of the ITAT (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1963, and Rule 24 of the Fundamental Rules. The court held that an annual increment is earned for service rendered in the preceding year and is not a reward for future service. The court reasoned that the increment accrues on the first day of the month following the year of service, and the employee's absence on LWA or probation status does not affect entitlement. The court found that the denial was arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned orders denying increment, and directed the respondents to grant the annual increment to the petitioners with consequential benefits and arrears within eight weeks.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Annual Increment - Entitlement - Increment earned for service rendered in preceding year cannot be denied merely because employee proceeded on Leave Without Allowance (LWA) or was on probation - The court held that increment is not a reward for future service but a recognition of past service, and denial would be arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution (Paras 10-15). B) Service Law - Probation - Annual Increment - Probationers are entitled to annual increment if they have rendered satisfactory service during the preceding year - The court held that there is no provision in the ITAT Rules or Fundamental Rules that disentitles a probationer from earning increment (Paras 16-18). C) Service Law - Fundamental Rules - Rule 24 - Leave Without Allowance - Period of LWA does not break continuity of service for increment purposes - The court held that increment accrues on the first day of the month following the year of service, and LWA does not affect entitlement (Paras 12-14).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners, who were on Leave Without Allowance (LWA) or on probation during the relevant period, are entitled to annual increment which became due on 1st January of the following year?
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned orders denying annual increment, and directed the respondents to grant the annual increment to the petitioners with consequential benefits and arrears within eight weeks.
Law Points
- Annual increment
- Leave Without Allowance
- Probation
- Fundamental Rules
- Rule 9(6) of ITAT (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules
- 1963
- Rule 24 of Fundamental Rules
