CAT - Delhi

Retirees of June 30 or December 31 entitled to one notional increment for pensionary benefits.

Sukhbir Singh Sodhi vs MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI

CAT - DelhiJUDGMENT: April 07, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The applicant, a 73-year-old retired employee, retired from service on 30.06.2013

Source reference: p.2

He sought the grant of one notional increment for the purpose of calculating pensionary benefits, a benefit typically claimed by employees retiring on 30th June or 31st December after completing a full year of service

Source reference: p.2

The applicant submitted multiple representations dated 20.10.2019, 07.04.2025, and 27.08.2025

Source reference: p.2, 3

The respondents initially declined the request, stating that no official orders regarding the payment of such increments had been received

Source reference: p.2

The applicant subsequently approached the Tribunal seeking implementation of established judicial precedents and Department of Personnel and Training (DoP&T) guidelines

Source reference: p.2, 3
02

Issues

1. Whether an employee retiring on 30th June is entitled to one notional increment for the purpose of pensionary benefits

Source reference: p.2

2. Whether the applicant is entitled to arrears of pension based on the notional increment and the permissible look-back period for such arrears

Source reference: p.3
03

Law Applied

The court primarily relied on the law settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Director (Admn. and HR), KPTCL v. C.P. Mundinamani & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 2471 of 2023), which held that employees retiring on 30th June or 31st December are entitled to one notional increment

Source reference: p.2

This was further clarified in Union of India v. M. Siddaraj (SLP (C) No. 4722/2021), establishing the modalities for implementation

Source reference: p.2

Regarding the limitation on arrears, the court applied the Supreme Court's order dated 20.02.2025 in MA Diary No. 2400/2024 (Union of India & Anr. v. M. Siddaraj), which stipulates that for employees who have filed legal proceedings, enhanced pension is payable for a period of three years prior to the month of institution of such proceedings

Source reference: p.3

the court noted DoP&T Office Memorandums dated 14.10.2024 and 20.05.2025, which directed all Ministries to ensure compliance with these judicial directions

Source reference: p.2, 3
04

Reasoning

The Tribunal observed that the legal entitlement to a notional increment for June/December retirees is no longer res integra due to the authoritative pronouncements in C.P. Mundinamani and M. Siddaraj

Source reference: p.2

The court noted that the applicant retired on 30.06.2013, making him eligible for the benefit under the aforementioned precedents

Source reference: p.2

The Tribunal further integrated the recent procedural modifications from the Supreme Court’s February 2025 order, noting that while the increment is granted notionally, the financial relief in the form of arrears is restricted to three years preceding the filing of the application

Source reference: p.3

Given that the DoP&T had already circulated instructions via OMs in 2024 and 2025 for time-bound compliance, the Tribunal found no reason for the respondents to keep the applicant's representation pending

Source reference: p.3, 4
05

Holding

The Tribunal allowed the OA and directed the respondents to dispose of the applicant's representation dated 27.08.2025 via a reasoned and speaking order within four weeks

The respondents were further ordered to grant one notional increment to the applicant within six weeks of that order and release the arrears in accordance with the law, specifically adhering to the three-year look-back period for arrears as per the modified directions in M. Siddaraj

Source reference: p.3, 4

No costs were awarded

Source reference: p.4
CAT - Delhi

Original Court PDF

Sukhbir Singh SodhivsMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI

CAT - Delhi · April 07, 2026

Click to open original judgment

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

Click to open original judgment