CAT - Delhi

Retirees completing one full year of service on retirement date are entitled to one notional increment.

Raj Kishore Rathore vs URBAN DEVELOPMENT DIVISION

CAT - DelhiJUDGMENT: March 11, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The applicant, a retired Technical Operator from the Central Public Works Department (CPWD), retired from service on 30.06.2021

Source reference: p. 2, para. 1

He filed the present Original Application (O.A.) seeking the grant of one notional increment effective from the date following his retirement.

Source reference: p. 2, para. 1

The applicant had previously submitted a representation on 17.10.2024 and a reminder on 28.11.2025 to the respondents, which remained unaddressed

Source reference: p. 2, para. 1

The applicant contended that the legal entitlement to such an increment is settled law

Source reference: p. 2, para. 1
02

Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to one notional increment on the date following his retirement after having completed one full year of service

Source reference: p. 2, para. 2

2. Whether the respondents should be directed to decide the applicant’s pending representations in a time-bound manner in light of settled judicial precedents

Source reference: p. 2, para. 4-6
03

Law Applied

The court primarily relied on the precedent set by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India & Anr. v. M. Siddaraj, which conclusively held that an employee who completes one year of service on the date of retirement is entitled to one notional increment w.e.f. the next date of retirement

Source reference: p. 2, para. 2

The Tribunal further referenced the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) Office Memorandum (OM) dated 20.05.2025, which provides administrative instructions for granting notional increments to eligible retirees

Source reference: p. 2, para. 2; p. 3, para. 5
04

Reasoning

The Tribunal observed that the legal question regarding notional increments is no longer res integra (an undecided point of law) due to the Apex Court’s ruling in M. Siddaraj and the subsequent DoPT instructions

Source reference: p. 2, para. 1-2

While the respondents initially requested time to file a counter-reply, the applicant’s counsel expressed satisfaction if the matter were resolved via a direction to the respondents to pass a reasoned and speaking order on the pending representations

Source reference: p. 2, para. 3-4

The Tribunal noted that the respondents’ counsel raised no objection to this approach

Source reference: p. 3, para. 5

Consequently, the Tribunal determined that the administrative authorities must apply the settled law and the relevant DoPT OM to the facts of the applicant's case to resolve his grievance at the departmental level

Source reference: p. 3, para. 5-6
05

Holding

The Tribunal disposed of the O.A. at the admission stage without expressing an opinion on the merits of the claim

It directed the respondents to decide the applicant's representations dated 17.10.2024 and 28.11.2025 by passing a reasoned and speaking order within eight weeks of receiving the certified copy of the order

Source reference: p. 3, para. 6

This decision must be made in light of the judgment in M. Siddaraj and the DoPT OM dated 20.05.2025

Source reference: p. 3, para. 5-6

No costs were awarded

Source reference: p. 4, para. 8
CAT - Delhi

Original Court PDF

Raj Kishore RathorevsURBAN DEVELOPMENT DIVISION

CAT - Delhi · March 11, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment