Yeshwant B. Valvaulikar And ANR v. State Of Goa, Thr. The Chief Secretary And 3 ORS
2026:BHC-GOA:625-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
Misc. Civil Application (MCA) No. 216 of 2025 in Writ Petition No. 447 of 2024 Yeshwant B. Valvaulikar and another
Versus
State of Goa, through this Chief Secretary Secretarait, Porvorim, Bardez, Goa and others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order Mr. Laban Carvalho, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Maria Correia Simone Judith, Additional Government Advocate for the Respondents.
CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE & NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, J.
DATED : 6th MARCH, 2026.
This Misc. Civil Application is filed by the applicants seeking recall/modification of paragraph 15 of the judgment dated 27.03.2025 in Writ Petition No. 447 of 2024.
2.
By the said judgment, this Court allowed the Writ Petition and held that the petitioners would be entitled to benefit of notional increment for the purpose of fixation of pension. While issuing the operative directions, this Court directed that the revised pension be paid
with effect from 01.05.2023, treating the petitioners as falling under clause (a) of the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and another Vs. M.Siddaraj in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 4722 of 2021.
3.
The applicants now contend that the writ petition was filed on 10.12.2021 i.e. prior to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M.Siddaraj (supra) dated 19.05.2023, and therefore their case would fall under clause (d) of the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
4.
The learned counsel appearing for the respondents fairly submits that the writ petition was indeed filed prior to the judgment in the case of M.Siddaraj (supra), and therefore the applicants would be governed by the clause (d) of the directions issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court.
5.
Clause (d) of the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court provides that in cases where a retired employee has filed a writ petition/application seeking such relief, the enhanced pension by including one increment would be payable for the period of three years prior to the month in which such proceedings were filed.
6.
In view of the aforesaid position and considering that the writ petition was filed prior to the judgment in the case of M.Siddaraj (supra), the applicants would be entitled to the benefit contemplated under clause (d) of the said directions.
7.
Consequently, paragraph 15 of the judgment dated 27.03.2025 stands modified and now read as under: "15. The upshot of the aforesaid rulings is that the petitioners would be entitled to receive notional increments for the respective years in which they superannuated on the 30th of June, but they would be paid pension based on their revised emoluments with the notional increments added with effect from 01.05.2018. The current pension of the petitioners would be revised accordingly and all arrears would be paid to them with effect from 01.05.2018 within a period of six months from the date of this order. Hence, the position of law concerning the date of crystallization of notional benefit is no longer res integra, and the instant petition is covered squarely by the ratio as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court."
8.
The Misc. Civil Application is disposed of in the above terms. [JUDGE] [JUDGE] Signed by: AMRUT NAGESH TARI Designation: Private Secretary Date: 30/03/2026 11:22:29