Gujarat High Court
Madhavji Kanjibhai Gajera vs Dhananjay Dwivedi, Additional Chief ... on 4 April, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/1990/2024 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONTEMPT) NO. 1990
of 2024
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 790 of 2018
=============================================
MADHAVJI KANJIBHAI GAJERA
Versus
DHANANJAY DWIVEDI, ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR NK MAJMUDAR(430) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
DELETED for the Opponent(s) No. 3
MS. NIRALI SARDA AGP for the Opponent(s) No. 1,2
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 04/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. The present application has been filed seeking initiation of the contempt proceedings against the respondents for willful and deliberate defiance of the judgment and order dated 24.01.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in the captioned writ petition.
2. At the outset, learned advocate Mr. Majmudar has submitted that the directions issued by the learned Single Judge are not entirely complied with and there are various benefits which the applicant is entitled to such as, increment, pay scale, regular pension, etc.
3. Per contra, learned AGP Ms. Nirali Sarda has submitted that by the order dated 17.10.2024 passed by the respondent authority, an amount of Rs.57,15,275/- is already paid to the Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Tue Apr 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 08 22:07:06 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/MCA/1990/2024 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2025 undefined applicant which comprises of the difference of pay, benefit of Tikku Pay Commission, benefit of revision of pay, 300 days leave encashment. The order dated 17.10.2024 is ordered to be taken on record.
3. The learned AGP has also submitted that, in fact, when the State had filed Letters Patent Appeal No.790 of 2018 assailing the judgment and order passed by this Court, the said appeal was disposed of by recording that the respondent i.e. present applicant - original petitioner has been paid all consequential benefits. She has further pointed out that the writ petition being Special Civil Application No.9171 of 2015 which is filed by the present applicant for claiming the benefits of higher pay scale considering deemed date in Class-I service from 17.10.1988 and other consequential benefits, difference of salary and other benefits, arrears of Gujarat Civil Services (Revision of Pay) of Rules, 2009 w.e.f. 1.1.2006, prayer of earned increments from 2001 to 2012, arrears of 6th Pay Revision of Pay Rules, etc. is still pending. Thus, it is submitted that present contempt proceedings may be closed.
4. The aforementioned facts about the pendency of the writ petition being Special Civil Application No.9171 of 2015 filed by the present applicant for claiming the aforesaid benefits is not denied. The said petition is pending for the benefits granted to the applicant vide order dated 17.10.2024 as mentioned herein above, an amount of Rs.57,15,275/- is also paid. This fact is also not denied by the present applicant. At this stage, we may refer to the directions issued by the Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Tue Apr 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 08 22:07:06 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/MCA/1990/2024 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2025 undefined learned Single Judge, of which, it is alleged that respondents have willfully and deliberately defied the order. The necessary directions read thus:
"19. In view of the foregoing discussion, this petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 24.1.2006 passed by the State Government as well as by the Commissioner, are quashed and set aside. The petitioner is ordered to be treated in service on the post of Joint Director (Malaria) till his date of superannuation. He will be entitled to all consequential benefits including the pension, if permissible under the Rules. He may be further entitled to interest on the arrears at the rate of 9% per annum from the date his services as Joint Director came to be terminated till his date of superannuation. It is made clear that if the arrears are not paid within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, the petitioner will be further entitled to interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date his services came to be terminated till the date of superannuation."
5. Thus, the learned Single Judge has directed to treat the present applicant in service on the post of Joint Director (Malaria) till his date of superannuation. However, at the same time, the learned Single Judge has directed that he will be entitled to all consequential benefits including the pension, "if permissible under the Rules". Thus, the learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition with a rider that he would be entitled to all consequential benefits including the pension, if the same is permissible under the Rules. Accordingly, respondents have already passed the order and fixed the pay of the applicant with deemed date, etc. The Letters Patent Appeal No.790 of 2018 which emanates from Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Tue Apr 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 08 22:07:06 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/MCA/1990/2024 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2025 undefined the order of the learned Single Judge, of which, the compliance is sought, filed by the State Government, the same was disposed of by recording that the respondents have given all consequential benefits. At that time, no objection has been raised by the applicant that he has not been paid the entire benefit as directed by the learned Single Judge. As mentioned herein above, the writ petition being Special Civil Application No.9171 of 2015 claiming the aforesaid benefits on the premise of the judgment of the learned Single Judge is also pending.
6. Hence, we are not inclined to further continue with the present proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act against the respondents. We closed the present proceedings. Present application stands dismissed. Notice discharged.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) (NISHA M. THAKORE,J) RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH/Sppl. 2 Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Tue Apr 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 08 22:07:06 IST 2025