Bombay High Court
SURESH UKHARDU JAYKARE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
An employee who has served at least six months in the year preceding superannuation is entitled to the annual increment, and the pensionary benefits must be recalculated to include that increment.
Summary
A batch of writ petitions filed by retired government employees sought the inclusion of a notional annual increment in their retirement benefits, arguing that they had served at least six months in the relevant year. The petitioners relied on Rule 10 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009, contending that the increment is earned after completing a year of service and is payable even if the employee superannuates on 30 June. The Court noted that the issue had been settled by its earlier judgment in Balaji Manikrao Biradar v. State of Maharashtra (2022) and affirmed by the Supreme Court in Director (ADMN. & HR) KPTCL v. V.C.P. Mundinamani (AIR 2023 SC 1956). It held that any employee who has worked for six months or more in the last year before superannuation is entitled to the annual increment, which must be factored into the calculation of pensionary benefits. Consequently, the petitions were partly allowed, directing the respondents to recalculate pension benefits including the increment and to pay any arrears within 90 days, without interest.
Issues considered
- The entitlement of a retired employee to the annual increment under Rule 10 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009 when superannuation occurs on 30 June.
- Whether the annual increment, earned after completing one year of service, is payable to an employee who retires before the increment is formally credited.
- Scope of recalculation of pensionary benefits to include the notional increment for employees who have served six months or more in the relevant year.
Legislation cited
- Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009 — s. Rule 10
Subjects
- annual increment
- pension recalculation
- Maharashtra Civil Services Rules
- Rule 10
- 6th Pay Commission
- retirement benefits
- writ petition
- partial relief
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:44580-DB
1 39-48-71+.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
39 WRIT PETITION NO. 12378 OF 2026
SURESH UKHARDU JAYKARE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Prashant D. Suryawanshi, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. N. D. Batule, AGP for Respondents/State
Mr. S. R. Dheple, Advocate for Respondents No. 3 to 5.
...
48 WRIT PETITION NO. 12388 OF 2026
RAJANI ASHOK MORE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Ms. Sangita M. Sonpethkar, Advocate for the Petitioner
Ms. S. S. Joshi, AGP for Respondents/State
...
71 WRIT PETITION NO. 12470 OF 2026
CHUNILAL SHAMRAO KOKANI AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
AND OTHERS
...
Mr. Swapnil A. deshmukh, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S. K. Tambe, AGP for Respondents
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12891 OF 2026
GOVIND DNYANOBA MACHAKURE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Ms. Nikita Kirjawalekar, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. V. M. Kagne, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12888 OF 2026
BALAJI SAKHARAM INGALE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
SVH
2 39-48-71+.odt
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Prashant D. Suryawanshi, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. B. B. Bhise AGP for Respondents/State
Mr. P. R. Tandale, Advocate for Respondent No. 3.
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12894 OF 2026
PRATAP MADHAVRAO SURYAWANSHI AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Ms. Sushama T. Jadhav, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. M. K. Goyanka, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12898 OF 2026
PRADEEP KASHIRAM PATIL
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Yogesh B. Bolkar, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. N. D. Batule, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12901 OF 2026
RAJESH MADHAVRAO PARALIKAR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Vishal A. Bagal, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. B. B. Bhise, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12904 OF 2026
DAVID GENDA DUDVE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Estling S. Murge, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S. R. Wakale, AGP for Respondents/State
SVH
3 39-48-71+.odt
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12906 OF 2026
MANIKRAO VISHVAMBHAR SHENGOLE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Yuvraj P. Pokale, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S. K. Tambe, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12907 OF 2026
DATTARAM JAKOJIRAO PATIL AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
ANOTHER
...
Mr. G. R. Syed, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. N. D. Batule, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12934 OF 2026
SURYAKANT VITTHALRAO KHANDEBHARAD AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Estling S. Murge, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. B. B. Bhise, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12945 OF 2026
ASHRUBA DHONDIBA KHANDAGALE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Estling S. Murge, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. N. D. Batule, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12943 OF 2026
NIMBA KALU MARATHE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
SVH
4 39-48-71+.odt
...
Mr. Estling S. Murge, Advocate for the Petitioner
Ms. Neha. B. Kamble, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12946 OF 2026
DASHARATH NARROTAM PATIL AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Pramod A. Pisal, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. M. K. Goyanka, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12947 OF 2026
VISHNU TUKARAM GAVANDE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Vishal A. Bagal, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. V. M. Kagne, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12931 OF 2026
RAM BASWANTRAO GHOTE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Vishal A. Bagal, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S. R. Wakale, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12933 OF 2026
DILIP BALARAM SAWANT AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Vaibhav U. Pawar, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. B. B. Bhise, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12935 OF 2026
VILAS GIRAJU SONAWANE AND OTHERS
SVH
5 39-48-71+.odt
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Ajay T. Kanawade, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. N. D. Batule, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12936 OF 2026
DHANAJI GOVARDHAN PATIL AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Estling S. Murge, Advocate for the Petitioner
Ms. Neha. B. Kamble, AGP for Respondents/State
Mr. B. B. Bhise, Advocate for Respondents Nos. 3 to 5.
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12917 OF 2026
EKNATH NANABHAU SARODE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Ajay T. Kanawade, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. M. K. Gayonka, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12918 OF 2026
BABASAHEB KISAN BADE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Sunil A. Nimbalkar, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. A. B. Girase, GP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12919 OF 2026
CHANDRABHAN KASHIRAM KATKAR AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Vaibhav U. Pawar, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S. K. Tambe, AGP for Respondents/State
SVH
6 39-48-71+.odt
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12923 OF 2026
RAVINDRA MURLIDHAR SONAWANE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Estling S. Murge, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S. K. Tambe, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12924 OF 2026
DEVIDAS SADASHIV GORE AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Tejrao B. Gadekar, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S. R. Wakale, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12925 OF 2026
UTTAM MAROTRAO INGLE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Estling S. Murge, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. N. D. Batule, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12926 OF 2026
LATIF LADDU MANSURI AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Jitendra V. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. B. B. Bhise, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12927 OF 2026
DILIP NAGORAO JOGE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
SVH
7 39-48-71+.odt
...
Mr. Jitendra V. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S. R. Wakale, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12928 OF 2026
CHHAGAN YUVRAJ PATIL AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. Jitendra V. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. M. k. Goyanka, AGP for Respondents/State
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12899 OF 2026
RAMESH TANHA BHARTI AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. P. D. Suryawanshi, Advocate for the Petitioner
Ms. S. S. Joshi, AGP for Respondents/State
Mr. S. R. Dheple, Advocate for Respondent No.3
…
CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
DATE : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
1. By these petitions, the petitioners seek directions to the
respondents to grant them notional / annual increment which was
due on 01st July i.e. after their retirement, as they have served with
good conduct for more than six months in a year. Further direction is
sought to recalculate their retirement benefits by including annual
increment and all the consequential service benefits.
2. Learned advocates for petitioners submit that the
petitioners are in fact seeking the benefit of Rule 10 of the
SVH
8 39-48-71+.odt
Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009.
3. The issue raised by these petitioners is no longer res
integra. Under the 6th Pay Commission, the year for accounting the
annual increments is from 1st July up to the 30th day of June of the
next year. The issue as to whether a candidate would be entitled for
such increment if he/she superannuates on 30 th June, was dealt with
by several Courts.
4. The judgment dated 4th May, 2022 delivered by this
Court in Writ Petition No. 14632 of 2021 [Balaji Manikrao Biradar vs.
State of Maharashtra & Others], led to the conclusion that since this
increment is not an advance increment, but is an increment which is
payable after completing one year of employment, notwithstanding
that a candidate superannuates after office hours on 30 th June, he is
deemed to have earned the annual increment and, therefore, the
increment is payable.
5. Several orders/judgments delivered by this Court were
assailed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the same have been
sustained. A large bunch of cases were taken up for adjudication by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Director (ADMN. and HR) KPTCL
vs. V. C. P. Mundinamani, reported in AIR 2023 SC 1956 and it
was concluded that the said increment is earned by an employee for
working over one year and hence, the employee is entitled to an
SVH
9 39-48-71+.odt
increment even if he/she retires on 30th June of a particular year.
6. Insofar as cases wherein an employee may have worked
for a lessor duration during one year, Rule 10 of the Maharashtra
Civil Services (Revised Pay), Rules, 2009 would cover cases of
employees who have worked for six months and above in the
revised pay structure as on 1st July, and would also be entitled for
the increment. All those petitioners who have worked for six months
and above in a particular year, would be entitled for the benefits of
the annual increment and their retirement dues would be calculated
by reckoning such increment while calculating their last drawn
wages.
7. In view of the above, the Writ Petitions are partly
allowed with following directions:-
(a) The petitioners would be entitled for monetary
benefits/difference of pensionary benefits as per the actuals
w.e.f. from their respective dates of superannuation,
provided they have worked for 6 months or more in the last
year up to their superannuation.
(b) The pensionary benefits of the petitioners would be
recalculated by including the annual increment in their last
drawn salary prior to their superannuation and such
recalculated pensionary benefits shall be payable to them.
SVH
10 39-48-71+.odt
(c) Arrears if any, shall be paid to them within a period of 90
days. Many of the petitioners have approached belatedly
before this Court and, therefore, akin to the orders passed
in several matters, they would be not entitled for the
interest component.
(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.) (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)
SVH
Checking your session…