Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

NAJMUDDIN MOHIUDDIN SIKLIGAR AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR THE SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The petition is partly allowed; pension benefits must be recalculated to include the annual increment, arrears payable within 90 days, and no interest awarded.

Summary

The petitioners, former government employees, challenged the calculation of their pensionary benefits, alleging they were denied the annual increment and appropriate arrears. The State of Maharashtra contended that the existing method of pension computation was correct. The Court examined prior orders of the same High Court in Writ Petitions No. 5445 of 2026, 3412 of 2026, and 15662 of 2025, finding that the petitioners were entitled to benefits based on actual service and last drawn salary. It held that petitioners who have worked at least six months in the year preceding superannuation must receive monetary benefits reflecting the difference in pensionary amounts. The Court directed that pension benefits be recalculated to include the annual increment, arrears be paid within ninety days, and denied any claim for interest due to the belated filing.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioners are entitled to pensionary benefits calculated on the basis of their actual service and last drawn salary including annual increment.
  • Whether arrears of pension, if any, should be payable and if interest is applicable for delayed claims.

Subjects

  • pension
  • superannuation
  • arrears
  • interest
  • government employees
  • writ petition

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:37820-DB


                                                 {1}                   23-wp-9539-2026

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                               23 WRIT PETITION NO. 9539 OF 2026

                             Najmuddin Mohiuddin Sikligar And Others
                                             VERSUS
                   The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Others
                                                 ...
              Mr. A.D. Pawar, Advocate for the Petitioners
              Mr. N.S. Tekale, AGP for State
                                               .......

                                     CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
                                               ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.


                                        DATE : 19th AUGUST, 2026
              PER COURT :

              1.    Indisputably, the issue raised in this petition is squarely covered

              by the orders dated 3rd July, 2026 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of

              this Court at Circuit Bench at Kolhapur in Writ Petition No. 5445 of

              2026 and dated 19th June, 2026 in Writ Petition No. 3412 of 2026.


              2.    Reliance is also placed on order dated 18 th March, 2026 passed

              by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, Bombay in

              Writ Petition No. 15662 of 2025.


              3.    For the reasons stated in the said orders, the Writ Petition is

              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.
                                             {2}                         23-wp-9539-2026

          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 not be entitled for the interest
         component.



(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.)                            (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)




Bhagyawant Punde


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.