CHANDIGARH: A single day can’t erase a yr of service, the Punjab and Haryana excessive court docket has dominated whereas deciding {that a} retiree can’t be disadvantaged of an earned increment just because his superannuation falls just a few hours earlier than it.The court docket handed these orders whereas granting reduction to a retired BSF inspector who was refused his increment solely as a result of he superannuated on the afternoon of Jun 30, 2016, only a day earlier than the hike grew to become due on Jul 1. Calling the increment “a reward for service really rendered”, the court docket dominated such advantages can’t be withheld on the premise of “hyper-technical” reasoning that violates constitutional equality ensures.Justice Sandeep Moudgil handed these orders whereas listening to a petition filed by Rajbir Singh, a retired inspector of BSF and a local of Bhiwani in Haryana. The petitioner was enrolled as a constable within the BSF on Sep 5, 1979, and through his lengthy service, earned a number of promotions, in the end retiring as inspector. Upon retirement, though the petitioner accomplished a full yr of service from Jul 1, 2015, to Jun 30, 2016, BSF authorities denied him the annual increment due on Jul 1, 2016, solely on the bottom that he retired earlier than completion of the final day.The petitioner was additionally denied encashment of 316 days of earned go away proven as lapsed, in addition to retirement TA below the seventh Pay Fee, although the seventh Central Pay Fee (CPC) was relevant with impact from Jan 1, 2016.In his plea, the petitioner argued that denial of annual increment is prohibited, arbitrary, and opposite to the settled place of legislation. It was argued the petitioner undeniably accomplished a full yr of service from Jul 1, 2015, to Jun 30, 2016, and due to this fact acquired a vested proper to obtain the annual increment that fell due on Jul 1, 2016.It was urged the BSF rejected the declare solely on the bottom that the petitioner retired on the afternoon of Jun 30, 2016, and was thus not “on obligation” on Jul 1, 2016, which is unfair.Opposing the plea, the central govt submitted that the petitioner had no authorized proper to say the, as he retired from service a day earlier than. It was argued that the petitioner ceased to be in service on the date when the increment was due, and due to this fact, by way of the relevant service guidelines, the increment couldn’t be granted after cessation of service. The petitioner’s pay fixation was duly verified and licensed as right by the accounts officer, inside audit occasion, South Bengal Frontier, leaving no scope for alleging any pay anomaly, BSF submitted.After listening to all events, the cdirected BSF to launch the revised advantages, together with the increment and seventh CPC-compliant TA/DA, inside 4 weeks of receiving the order.