Bombay High Court
LOTAN SHRAVAN THAKUR AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
An employee who has rendered at least six months of service in the year preceding superannuation is entitled to the annual increment under Rule 10 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009, and the pension must be calculated on that revised salary.
Summary
The petitioners, retired government employees, sought directions for the Zilla Parishad to grant them the notional annual increment that became due on 1 July after their retirement, arguing that they had rendered at least six months of service in the preceding year. They relied on Rule 10 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009, and the accounting year prescribed by the 6th Pay Commission. The Court noted that earlier decisions, including Balaji Manikrao Biradar v. State of Maharashtra (2022) and Director (ADMN. and HR) KPTCL v. V. C. P. Mundinamani (2023), held that an employee who superannuates on 30 June is deemed to have earned the annual increment if he/she has worked six months or more in that year. Accordingly, the Court partially allowed the writ petitions, directing that pension benefits be recalculated to include the increment, arrears be paid within 90 days, and no interest be awarded for delayed claims. The order applies to all petitioners who satisfy the six‑month service condition.
Issues considered
- Whether a government employee who superannuates on 30 June is entitled to the annual increment for that year under Rule 10 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009.
- Whether pensionary benefits must be recalculated to incorporate the earned annual increment.
- Whether interest is payable on arrears of pensionary benefits when the claim is made belatedly.
Legislation cited
- Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009 — s. Rule 10
Subjects
- annual increment
- pension calculation
- superannuation
- Maharashtra Civil Services Rules
- 6th Pay Commission
- writ petition
- retirement benefits
Judgment
*1* 28-wp-12133-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
28 WRIT PETITION NO. 12133 OF 2026
Suresh Shivdas Pawar And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Patil Vinod Prakash, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. B. B. Bhise, AGP for Respondents/State
…
AND
44 WRIT PETITION NO. 12150 OF 2026
Mahadeo Goroba Gaikwad And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others
...
Mr. Deshpande Chaitanya Rajesh, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. A. B. Girase, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
1 WRIT PETITION NO. 12533 OF 2026
Kisan Shenfed Magare
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Principal Secretary And
Others
...
Mr. Govind R. Ingole & Mr. Babasaheb V. Ambhore, Advocate for
the Petitioner
Mr. M. K. Goyanka, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
2 WRIT PETITION NO. 12534 OF 2026
Baban Rambhau Avhad And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary And Others
...
Narwade
*2* 28-wp-12133-2026
Mr. Murge Estling S., Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S. K. Tambe, AGP for Respondents
...
AND
3 WRIT PETITION NO. 12538 OF 2026
Anita Ramesh Patel
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Principal Secretary And
Others
...
Mr. Pisal Pramod A., Advocate for the Petitioner
Ms. S. S. Joshi, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
4 WRIT PETITION NO. 12551 OF 2026
Shardini Dhondurao Suryawanshi
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Principal Secretary And
Others
...
Mr. Kale Anil Panditrao, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. B. B. Bhise, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
5 WRIT PETITION NO. 12557 OF 2026
Namdeo Arjun Thakare And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary And Others
...
Mr. Murge Estling S., Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S. K. Tambe, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
6 WRIT PETITION NO. 12559 OF 2026
Eknath Bhivaji Bhor And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others
Narwade
*3* 28-wp-12133-2026
...
Mr. Murge Estling S., Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. V. M. Kagne, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
7 WRIT PETITION NO. 12560 OF 2026
Suresh Shankarrao Jadhav And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Principal Secretary And
Others
...
Mr. Madde Shrikant B, Advocate for the Petitioner
Ms. N. B. Kamble, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
8 WRIT PETITION NO. 12561 OF 2026
Lotan Shravan Thakur And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others
...
Mr. Bolkar Yogesh B., Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. N. D. Batule, AGP for Respondents/State
Mr. S. R. Dheple, Advocate for Respondent Nos.4 and 5
...
AND
9 WRIT PETITION NO. 12568 OF 2026
Sajan Jeevan Patil And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others
...
Mr. Shaikh Mohammad Naseer A, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S. R. Wakle, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
10 WRIT PETITION NO. 12562 OF 2026
Navnath Dashrath Kamble And Others
VERSUS
Narwade
*4* 28-wp-12133-2026
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Rajendra G. Hange & Mr. H. R. Hange, Advocate for the
Petitioner
Mr. A. G. Girase, G.P. for Respondents/State
Mr. Suhas R. Shirsath, Advocate for Respondent Nos.6, 8 and 9
...
AND
11 WRIT PETITION NO. 12547 OF 2026
Ravindra Purushottam Chaudhari And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Jitendra Vijay Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner
Ms. S. S. Joshi, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
12 WRIT PETITION NO. 12548 OF 2026
Ashok Bhimrao Marathe And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Patil Jitendra Vijay, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. M. K. Goyanka, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
13 WRIT PETITION NO. 12549 OF 2026
Pramod Ziparu Kuwar And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Ohters
...
Mr. Patil Jitendra Vijay, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. B. B. Bhise, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
14 WRIT PETITION NO. 12550 OF 2026
Shaikh Shakil Shaikh Ismail And Others
Narwade
*5* 28-wp-12133-2026
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Principal Secretary And
Others
...
Mr. Patil Jitendra Vijay, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. V. M. Kagne, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
15 WRIT PETITION NO. 12552 OF 2026
Shobha Pandit Wani And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Patil Jitendra Vijay, Advocate for the Petitioner
Ms. N. B. Kamble, AGP for Respondents/State
Mr. S. R. Dheple, Advocate for Respondent Nos.4 and 5
...
AND
16 WRIT PETITION NO. 12553 OF 2026
Ujvala Dnyaneshwar Gaikwad And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Patil Jitendra Vijay, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S. R. Wakle, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
17 WRIT PETITION NO. 12554 OF 2026
Harendrakumar Pandharinath Shete And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Patil Jitendra Vijay, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. N. D. Batule, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
18 WRIT PETITION NO. 12555 OF 2026
Narwade
*6* 28-wp-12133-2026
Trambak Vitthal Patil And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Patil Jitendra Vijay, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. A. G. Girase, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
19 WRIT PETITION NO. 12556 OF 2026
Tajsultana Riyaz Ahemed Lunje And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Principal Secretary And
Others
...
Mr. Patil Jitendra Vijay, Advocate for the Petitioner
Ms. N. B. Kamble, AGP for Respondents/State
...
AND
20 WRIT PETITION NO. 11771 OF 2026
Vasant Dattatray Wavhal And Ohters
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Arvind Gopalrao Ambetkar, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. B. B. Bhise, AGP for Respondents/State
...
CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI &
ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
DATE : 16th SEPTEMBER 2026
P. C. :-
1. By these petitions, the petitioners seek directions to
the respondent Zilla Parishad 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
Narwade
*7* 28-wp-12133-2026
in a year. Further direction is sought to recalculate their
retirement benefits by including annual increment and all the
consequential service benefits.
2. Learned advocate for petitioners submit that the
petitioners are in fact seeking the benefit of Rule 10 of the
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 30th
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 30th June, he is
deemed to have earned the annual increment and, therefore, the
increment is payable.
Narwade
*8* 28-wp-12133-2026
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 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:-
Narwade
*9* 28-wp-12133-2026
(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.
(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.)
Narwade
Checking your session…