JUDGMENT 1. - By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction for re-fixation of his pension and a further direction not to consider order of punishment to be continued, affecting pensionary benefit. 2. It is contended that petitioner was inflicted with the punishment of stoppage of two grade increments without cumulative effect for a period of three years vide order dated 14.03.1997. Petitioner thereafter retired from the Government service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.03.1999. The controversy arose when retiral benefit was fixed on the pay without adding increments for previous two years i.e. starting from the date of punishment till the retirement. Referring to circular issued by the Department of Personal at Annexure-10, Para 2, it is contended that even as per the decision taken by the government, punishment of stoppage of grade increment without cumulative effect should have come to an end on the date of retirement. Referring to Para 2 of the said circular, it has been demonstrated that if an order of punishment is imposed stopping grade increment without cumulative effect and part of that punishment is effected while an employee is in service and that left out portion of the punishment cannot be continued on retirement of the employee and thereby pension and the other retiral benefits has to be given by notionally fixing pay of petitioner on the date of retirement by giving the benefit of increments so stopped without cumulative effect. In view of circular referred to above, prayer of learned counsel for the petitioner is that since petitioner having retired on 31.03.1999, his pay should have been fixed after adding benefit of two grade increments notionally and all retiral benefits should have been given accordingly. 3. Learned counsel for respondents, on the other hand, submits that circular in reference at Annexure-10 is having prospective effect and cannot be applied to the case in hand since petitioner retired on 31.03.1999 and otherwise circular issued on 28.06.2003. It is contended that since the order of punishment was passed and if during the currency period of punishment, an employee retires, the order of punishment cannot be made ineffective. It is, thus contended that action of respondents in not re-fixing the pay for grant of retiral benefits cannot be said to be bad. 4. I have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the record of the case carefully. 5. It is, thus contended that action of respondents in not re-fixing the pay for grant of retiral benefits cannot be said to be bad. 4. I have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the record of the case carefully. 5. The petitioner is punished with minor punishment of stoppage of two grade increments without cumulative effect vide order dated 14.03.1991 and thereafter, petitioner retired on 31.03.1999. In case, where minor punishment of stoppage of grade increment without cumulative effect is imposed upon an employee, then for a period for which such benefit of increments is denied, is to be given to the employee actually, but immediately on completion of the period of punishment, the employee is given due benefit of increments notionally i.e. as if the increment was not stopped and accordingly, restoring position of employee regarding re-fixation after expiry of the period of punishment, he gets all other benefits. Thus, loss sustained out of the punishment of stoppage of grade increment without cumulative effect is an actual loss to an employee and otherwise it does not affect future right of the employee only for the period involved and otherwise it becomes a major punishment, inasmuch as, stoppage of grade increment without cumulative effect is affecting the pay of the employee forever. If we takes this matter in the light of the above position, then it becomes clear that benefit of grade increment so stopped is not restored for deciding pensionary benefits, then petitioner is denied the increment forever, which resulted in a major punishment. Since petitioner was served with charge-sheet under Rule 17 of the C.C.A. Rules and imposed minor punishment, the effect of stoppage of grade increment cannot be made for over and resultantly on the date when the petitioner retires, the position has to be restored by granting benefit of increments so stopped by giving notional fixation. The Government had issued the circular dated 29.06.2003 and since it is explanatory in nature, thus it applies to all the cases and cannot turn to be prospective in nature. It is not a rule, which has been made prospective, since some clarification has been made, it has to be applied to all the cases. The Government had issued the circular dated 29.06.2003 and since it is explanatory in nature, thus it applies to all the cases and cannot turn to be prospective in nature. It is not a rule, which has been made prospective, since some clarification has been made, it has to be applied to all the cases. Taking note of the circular also, what comes out is that whatever period undergone due to by punishment, that will come to amend on the date of retirement and after notional fixation of the pay of the petitioner, retiral benefit has been extended. 6. In view of the above discussion as well as in view of the clarifications made in the circular, petitioner is entitled for retiral benefit after fixing of his pay notionally on the date of retirement. The fixation of pay has to be made after grant of benefit of the increments so stopped on notional basis. The respondents are directed to extend benefit of pension and other retiral benefit after fixing the pay scale of the petitioner as directed above. Necessary and consequential benefits arising out of this order may be extended to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 7. In view of the above discussion made above, the writ petition is allowed with no order as to costs.Writ Petition Allowed as Above. *******