State Of Gujarat vs Sunilkumar Popatbhai Patel

Gujarat High Court

State Of Gujarat vs Sunilkumar Popatbhai Patel on 9 April, 2025

Author: A. S. Supehia

Bench: A.S. Supehia

                                                                                                           NEUTRAL CITATION




                          C/LPA/32/2024                                 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025

                                                                                                            undefined




                                                              Reserved On   : 27/03/2025
                                                              Pronounced On : 09/04/2025

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                              R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 32 of 2024
                                                 In
                            R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2160 of 2019


                      FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


                      HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA - Sd/-

                      and

                      HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE -Sd/-

                      ======================================

                                 Approved for Reporting
                                                   Yes    No
                                                    
                      ======================================
                                 STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
                                          Versus
                            SUNILKUMAR POPATBHAI PATEL & ORS.
                      ======================================
                      Appearance:
                      MS. SHRUTI DHRUVE, AGP for the Appellant Nos. 1,2,3
                      MR. G.M. JOSHI, SR. ADVOCATE WITH MR GAURAV CHUDASAMA(5660)
                      for the Respondent Nos. 1,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,2,3,5,6,7,8
                      ======================================

                      CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
                             and
                             HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE


                                                      CAV JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA) Page 1 of 20 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 23:46:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined

1. Admit. Mr. Gaurav Chudasama, learned advocate waives service of admission on behalf of the respondents.

2. The present appeal filed under clause 15 of the Letters Patent, 1865 is directed against the judgment dated 22 nd July 2022 passed by the learned Single Judge directing the appellant - State to operate the seniority of the respondents employees from the initial date of appointment post the period of five years in light of the Government Resolution dated 18 th January, 2017 and 20th January, 2018.

BRIEF FACTS 2.1 All the respondent-employees(original writ petitioners) are appointed as Revenue Talati and Revenue Clerks in the year 2009-10 on fixed pay for a period of five years under the respondent-Revenue Department as per the policy of fixed pay of the State Government. The State Government introduced the policy of appointing the Government employees on a fixed pay initially by the resolution issued by the Finance Department on 16th February, 2006. Thereafter another Resolution was issued on 22nd January, 2009 by the General Administration Department (GAD) regulating the period of five years of fixed pay of such employees. The appointment orders of the respondents reflect that they were appointed for a fixed period of five years and on successful completion of five years' contractual period they were thereafter placed in the regular pay scale. This is done in view of the policy of the State Government. The appointment orders refer to the policy dated 16th February 2006 issued by the Finance Department Page 2 of 20 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 23:46:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined of the State Government.

2.2 Accordingly all the respondents, after completion of successful five years, have been placed in the regular pay scale.

2.3 After they were placed in the regular pay scale, they sought request transfers to other districts and accordingly such requests were allowed and they were transferred to their choice of district on the condition of foregoing their seniority of the service rendered in the earlier districts in the year 2016-17.

2.4 One of such orders is dated 15 th February, 2016 passed in case of employee Smt. Poojaben Pravindan Gadhavi, incorporating the condition no.1, that from the date of reporting in the new district, her name will be placed at the end of the seniority in the cadre of Revenue Clerk of the respective district and no request for fixing the seniority from the initial date of appointment shall be entertained in future. An undertaking was also obtained from the respondents to the effect that they will not claim seniority from their date of appointment after they join the new districts and the service, which they have rendered in the earlier districts will not be counted for the purpose of seniority. Thus, all the respondents joined their new district as per their choice giving up their claim for seniority of service rendered by them in the earlier districts.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined 2.5 It appears that thereafter the State Government issued a Resolution dated 18th January, 2017 (Finance Department) clarifying the fixed pay policy of the State Government and the period of five years rendered by the employees on fixed pay. The State Government decided that the period of five years which an employee has rendered on a fixed pay and the employees who have been appointed in view of the Resolution dated 16th February, 2006 issued by the Finance Department, the five years fixed pay service shall be counted for all purposes including promotion, seniority, higher pay scale and all the retirement benefits. However, this Resolution stipulated a cut-off date of 1 st February, 2017 for its prospective implementation. This gave rise to the cause of the filing of the captioned writ petition by the respondents. The respondents challenged the Government Resolution dated 18th January, 2017 and also prayed for directing the State- authorities to treat the seniority from their original date of appointment and not from the date of order of reporting at the transferred districts. The learned Single Judge, allowed their writ petitions by directing the respondents to count their seniority from their initial date of appointment. However, the learned Single Judge did not set aside the Government Resolution dated 18th January, 2017. It appears that after the issuance of such Resolution dated 18 th January, 2017, the General Administration Department issued a Government Resolution dated 20th January, 2018 clarifying the resolution dated 18th January, 2017 which was in the favour of the Respondents.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined 2.6 The judgment and order passed in the captioned writ petition and other similar orders passed by the learned Single Judge has been implemented by the appellant State department by issuing the order dated 02.08.2023 in case of 47 petitioners subject to the result of letters patent appeal. Further deemed date of promotion to the post of Deputy Mamlatdar has also been conferred to some of such petitioners subject to the result of appeal.

2.7 The State being aggrieved by such direction has filed the captioned Letters Patent Appeal.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT-STATE

3. Ms. Dhruve, learned AGP for the appellant - State while pointing-out the Government Resolution dated 18 th January, 2017 has submitted that the respondents cannot be conferred the benefit of seniority from their initial date of appointment as the same would be made applicable from such date, as mentioned in the said Resolution.

3.1 She has also pointed-out the transfer orders in case of each of the employees including the Undertakings given by them while requesting to transfer them at their choice of district on the condition of relinquishing their seniority rendered in the earlier district. She has submitted that the respondents are bound by the conditions of transfer order as well as the Undertakings and hence, it is urged that the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge may Page 5 of 20 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 23:46:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined be quashed and set aside.

3.2 Learned AGP has also referred to the Government Resolution dated 22nd January, 2009 issued by the General Administration Department, State of Gujarat, more particularly paragraph no.17, which stipulates about regulating the seniority of the employees who have chosen to seek transfer to other districts. In juxtaposition, reference is made by her to the clause 1 of the Government Resolution dated 20th January, 2018, and has submitted that the procedure for preparing the seniority list, as prescribed in the said Resolution, is confined to clauses 10, 11 and 22 of the Government Resolution dated 22.01.2009, and not for clause

17. She has submitted that clause 17 of the said Resolution specifically mentions that in case of request transfer, the incumbent will lose the seniority of earlier district, and his/her seniority will be counted afresh from the date on which he/she reports in the new district.

3.3 Learned AGP, while referring to the order dated 1 st July, 2023 issued by the Revenue Department, which is passed pursuant to the contempt proceedings initiated by the respondents - employees for implementation of the directions issued in the captioned writ petition, has submitted that the details of the respondents - employees - original petitioners at Annexure-I will reflect that all of them have sought transfer after the issuance of Government Resolution dated 18 th January, 2017 and hence, they are not entitled to benefit of the aforesaid resolution. It is further submitted that pursuant Page 6 of 20 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 23:46:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined to the contempt proceedings initiated by the respondents - employees for implementation of directions issued by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment and order dated 22nd July, 2022, the State Government has already implemented the directions of the order dated 1 st July, 2023 subject to the decision of the present LPA.

3.4 It is submitted that the learned Single Judge has rejected the writ petition being Special Civil Application no.16634 of 2020 of those petitioners who have sought request transfer after the Resolution dated 18 th January, 2017, hence 13 respondents out of 17 will not be entitled to any relief in view of rejection of similarly situated employee.

3.5 In support of her submission, learned AGP has placed reliance on the recent judgment of the Supreme Court dated 25th March, 2025 passed in Civil Appeal no.4356 of 2025 in the case of The Secretary to Government Department of Health & Family Welfare and Anr. Vs. K. C. Devaki. Thus, it is urged that the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge may be quashed and set aside.

4. Per contra, Mr. G. M. Joshi, learned Senior Advocate appearing with Mr. Gaurav Chudasama, learned advocate for the respondents has urged that the issue raised in the present appeal is no more res integra since, pursuant to the various orders passed by this Court, the State Government has already implemented similar directions and the employees are already extended the benefit of seniority from their initial date Page 7 of 20 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 23:46:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined of appointment.

4.1 He has referred to the paper-book provided to this Court as well as to the learned AGP.

4.2 Mr. G. M. Joshi, learned Senior Advocate for the respondents - employees submitted that the respondents cannot be made to suffer because of discriminatory treatment extended to them and to the similarly situated respondents employees. It is submitted that since the Government Resolution dated 18th January, 2017 was issued by the State Government, regulating the period of five years of fixed pay, for all purposes including promotion, seniority, higher pay scale and retirement benefits with prospective effect, the respondents were constrained to file the captioned writ petition.

4.3 It is submitted that subsequently, when the State Government realized that the employees like the respondents will lose their seniority, they issued a clarificatory Resolution dated 20th January, 2018 promulgating that all the employees who are appointed pursuant to the fixed pay policy of the State Government, will be entitled to the seniority from the initial date of appointment. It is submitted that the undertakings given by the respondents cannot be used against them, since at the relevant time, there was no decision of the State Government for regulating the seniority, which has been done as per the Resolutions subsequently issued in the years 2018 and 2020.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined 4.4 It is contended that due to change in policy, all the employees, who are appointed in the year 2010, 2012 and 2015, after the respondents, will steal a march over them in the matter of seniority, if the stand of the State Government is accepted. It is submitted that the cadre of Revenue Clerk and Revenue Talati is a feeder cadre for the post of Deputy Mamlatdar, and the same is premised on the general seniority of all the Revenue Clerks and Revenue Talatis of all the districts taken together. It is contended that the orders of request transfers do not mention that the respondents will lose their seniority at the State level. It is thus, submitted that while reckoning the seniority, their original date of appointment has to be considered ignoring the loss of seniority.

4.5 It is clarified by Mr. Joshi, learned Senior Advocate, that there are 13 employees who are the original writ petitioners before the learned Single Judge and the employees nos.9 and 13, Shri Sandip H. Patel and Shri Mehul Rasikbhai Thaker, whose names figure in Annexure-I to the order dated 1 st July, 2023, the direction issued by the learned Single Judge will not apply, as they have chosen to seek transfer after the Resolution dated 18th January, 2017. Thus, it is urged that the Letters Patent Appeal may be rejected.

ANALYSIS AND OPINION

5. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties at length.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined

6. The case of the State Government as well as the respondent-employees hinges on the Government Resolutions dated 22nd January, 2009, 18th January, 2017 and 20th January, 2018.

7. The facts, which are not in dispute are that all the respondents are appointed on a fixed pay for a period of five years as Revenue Clerks and Revenue Talati pursuant to the policy of the State Government introduced vide Finance Department Resolution dated 16the February, 2006. The condition no.21 of the Government Resolution dated 16 th February, 2006 mentions that the period rendered by the employees for five years on fixed pay will not be counted for any purpose. Accordingly, with these conditions, all the respondents were appointed in the year 2009-10. All the respondents on successful completion of such five years service, are placed in the regular pay scale. When they were placed in the regular pay-scale in the year 2014-15, the policy dated 16th February, 2006 was prevailing, which mentions that their services of five years will not be counted for any purpose and accordingly, after they were regularized in the year 2014-15, they requested to be transferred to the districts of their choice in the year 2016-2017. Such request was acceded by the State Government and they were allowed to be joined at various districts of their choice. Accordingly, the respondents also gave Undertakings that they will not claim any seniority of their services rendered in their former districts in which they rendered five years fixed pay service. Their appointment orders issued in the new districts also refer Page 10 of 20 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 23:46:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined that they will not claim any seniority of earlier service, and they will be placed in the bottom of the seniority list of the new districts, in which they have chosen to get themselves transferred.

ISSUE OF APPLICABILITY OF GOVERNMENT RESOLUTION DATED 22.01.2009 IN CASE OF THE RESPONDENTS

8. The State has primarily placed reliance on clause 17 of the Resolution dated 22nd January, 2009, which mentions that "in cases where the seniority of respective cadre in a district is determined, and an employee of such cadre is transferred at his request to other district, then in that case, his seniority is required to be fixed after other employees working in the transferred district, however, the seniority shall be fixed from the date of reporting on duty". The same will not apply to the case of the respondents as discussed below.

9. The Government Resolution dated 22.01.2009 is issued by the General Administration Department for regulating the seniority of all the employees who were working in the entire State. It prescribes a comprehensive procedure of determination and publishing of seniority of the employees who are Promoted (Clause 8), appointed after passing competitive examination (Clause 9), appointed through direct recruitment (Clause 10), appointed through Gujarat Public Service Commission (GPSC) or other recruiting agencies, and also by considering the departmental examination rules of promotion and direct recruitment (Clause 11). Clause 13 of Page 11 of 20 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 23:46:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined the said Resolution prescribes fixation of seniority in unusual cases where the rules are not specifically applicable. In such cases, the seniority is to be determined from the "Date of Continuous Officiation on Regular Appointment".

10. In the case of the respondents, there were no specific rules governing their seniority, and it was only governed by the clause 21 of the Government Resolution dated 16 th February, 2006, which mentions that the period of five years on fixed pay will not be considered for service benefits.

11. By another Government Resolution dated 4th June, 2009 issued by the General Administration Department, the procedure for fixing the seniority of Class-III and Class-IV employees, who are appointed on fixed pay as per the policy of Resolution dated 16th February, 2006 was declared. As per Clause 2 of the said Resolution, the seniority of these employees shall be determined from the date of placing them in the regular pay scale. Thus, at the relevant time, when the respondents were appointed, the issue of determination of seniority was specifically governed by Clause 2 of the Resolution dated 4th June, 2009 issued by the General Administration Department and not as per the provision of Resolution dated 22nd January, 2009.

12. The Resolution dated 22nd January, 2009, on which reliance is placed by the State, does not encompass the cases of those Class-III and Class-IV employees who are appointed pursuant to the fixed pay policy of five years. The Resolution Page 12 of 20 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 23:46:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined dated 4th June, 2009 is specifically introduced by the General Administration Department for regulating the seniority of employees like the respondents, who are appointed on fixed pay for five years.

ANALYSIS OF THE GOVERNMENT RESOLUTIONS DATED 18.01.2017 AND 20.01.2018

13. As held by us, as above, the issue of seniority of the fixed pay employees like the respondents was governed by the Resolution dated 04.06.2009, which was specifically introduced in view of policy dated 16.02.2006.

14. Thereafter, the issue of seniority was resurrected by the Government by issuing the Government Resolution dated 18 th January, 2017. This Resolution has been issued by the Finance Department by considering the fixed pay policy dated 16th February, 2006 for regulating the initial period of five years rendered by the employees on a fixed pay. Paragraph no.2 of the Resolution dated 18 th January, 2017 is translated and incorporated as under :-

"Presently, the lump sum pay tenure of five years for the employees appointed under the Fixed Pay Scheme, is not being taken into consideration for any service related/employment related issues. After due consideration, the State Government has also resolved in this regard that the service of five years in respect of the fixed pay employees appointed under Scheme dated 16/02/2006 of the Finance Department, shall be considered as the service tenure for promotion, seniority, higher grade pay Page 13 of 20 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 23:46:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined scale and retirement benefits admissible at the time of superannuation."

15. As per the aforementioned clarification, five years of ad- hoc service on fixed pay of those employees, who are appointed as per the policy of the State Government dated 16.02.2006 is required to be considered for the purpose of promotion, seniority, higher grade pay, as well as retirement benefits. Thus, for the first time, it was promulgated that the fixed pay service of five years will be counted for all purposes including seniority. This was made applicable to all the employees, who were appointed pursuant to the fixed pay policy dated 16.02.2006. However, as per the condition no.5, this Resolution was given prospective effect from 1 st February, 2017.

16. Since the employees like the respondents realized that they were left-out from the ambit of the Resolution dated 18 th January, 2017, they approached this Court and filed the writ petitions.

17. Thereafter, the General Administration Department issued another Resolution on 20 th January, 2018 further clarifying the issue of seniority of fixed pay employees. It is pertinent to note that this Resolution refers to the Resolutions dated 16th February, 2006 of Finance Department, 22 nd January, 2009 of General Administration Department and 18 th January, 2017 of Finance Department. The General Administration Department of the State Government further clarified the seniority of the employees who were appointed Page 14 of 20 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 23:46:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined on fixed pay and the same is translated and incorporated as under :-

(1) Employees appointed on a contract basis with fixed pay shall be placed in the seniority list according to the date on which they join the contractual service and taking into account the instruction contained in paragraphs 10, 11 and 22 of the resolution dated 22/01/2009 of the GAD, according to the merit rank, obtained in the competitive examination.

(2) As long as such employees are performing their duties during the contractual period, it shall be mentioned in the 'Remarks' column of the Provisional Seniority List as "Performing duties on contractual period".

(3) Prior to publishing these instructions for arranging seniority according to the date on which employees, appointed on a contract basis with fixed pay, join the contractual service and the merit rank obtained in the competitive examination, in cases where the seniority of employees has been arranged after considering the date of regular appointment after the expiry of the term of the contract, a new place must be given in the seniority as per the above point no. (1), and the seniority list shall be prepared accordingly.

While deciding the seniority of the employees serving with fixed pay on contract basis, the above instructions and the instructions of preparing seniority list issued vide resolutions dated 22/01/2009 and 30/01/2014 of the General Administrative Department shall be taken into consideration.

Under the fixed pay policy dated 16/02/2006 of the Finance Department, the seniority of the employees, who are appointed in the batch of 2012 or earlier and whose contract period is completed/to be completed, shall be fixed according to the aforementioned principle.

By order and in the name of the Governor of Gujarat.

18. It is clarified that the seniority of contractual fixed pay employees, who are appointed under the fixed pay policy of Page 15 of 20 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 23:46:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined the Finance Department dated 16th February, 2006 in the batch of 2012 or earlier, and those who have completed contract period shall be fixed on the principles mentioned in the Resolution dated 22nd January, 2009. Thus, a decision is taken to extend the benefit of seniority with retrospective effect from the batch of "2012 or earlier" which include the respondents.

19. For the first time vide the aforesaid Clause 1, after the appointment of the respondents, the Resolution dated 22 nd January, 2009 was made applicable to the extent of instructions issued in paragraph nos.10, 11 and 22. Clause 1 of the Resolution dated 20th January, 2018, specifically stipulates that the seniority of fixed pay contractual employees shall be determined from the date of joining by taking into account the instructions contained in paragraph nos.10, 11, and 22 of the Resolution dated 22 nd January, 2009 according to the merit rank, obtained in the competitive examination. Clauses 10, 11 and 12 refers to the direct recruitees who are appointed through competitive examinations. Similarly, clause 11 refers to the recruitment through Gujarat Public Service Commission, and other recruiting agencies and Clause 12 refers to regulating the seniority on the basis of departmental examination rules in case of promotees and direct recruitees. Thus, the intent behind Clause 1 is the determination of seniority of those employees who are recruited in the manner as mentioned in Clauses 10, 11 and 12 on the basis of their merit rank. Indisputably, the recruitment of the respondents was Page 16 of 20 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 23:46:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined undertaken by the Gujarat Subordinate Selection Board, which will fall under Clause 11 of the Resolution dated 22 nd January, 2009.

20. The appointment orders of the respondents, issued in the new district do not mention Clause 17 of the Resolution dated 22nd January, 2009, and precisely so, since the same was not made applicable to the employees appointed pursuant to the fixed pay policy of the Finance Department. There is no clause introduced in both the Resolutions of 2017 or 2018 that the fixed pay employees who seek transfer, after the date of issuance of the Resolutions, will lose their seniority.

21. The Finance Department, for the first time, issued the Resolution dated 18th January, 2017 clarifying that the five years fixed pay period will be counted for all purposes including seniority, however it was given prospective effect w.e.f. 1st February, 2017. The five years' service of fixed pay was to be treated as non-est in view of Clause 12 of the Finance department Resolution dated 16 th February, 2006 under which the respondents were appointed as well as the Resolution dated 4th June, 2009. Hence, the respondents chose to give up their seniority since they were permitted to be transferred at their choice of districts, by realizing that the Resolutions dated 16th February, 2006 and 4th June, 2009, even otherwise did not extend any benefit of their five years fixed pay for any purpose. The Finance Department gave the ray of hope of counting the fixed pay service of five years for all purposes by introducing the Resolution dated 18 th January, Page 17 of 20 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 23:46:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined 2017. The prospective effect of the same resulted into heart burning. However, it has been subsequently taken care of by the General Administration Department by issuing Resolution dated 22nd January, 2019, which amalgamated all the Resolutions issued by both the departments. There is no clarification issued either in the Resolution dated 18 th January, 2017 or in the Resolution dated 22 nd January, 2018, that the employees like the respondents, who had sought request transfer, by relinquishing their seniority are excluded by treating them as a separate class. In case, the State Government was of the opinion that such categories of employees, will not be covered, then a specific clause in this regard was required to be introduced in both the Resolutions of 2017 and 2018, or in the alternative a special reference was required to be made in context with Clause 17 along with Clauses 10, 11, and 12 in the Resolution dated 22 nd January, 2018. In absence of such negative clause in the Resolutions, a presumption cannot be drawn that the respondents will be governed by the provision of Clause 17 of Resolution dated 22nd January, 2009. Thus, the Undertakings given by the respondents at the relevant time will pale into insignificance in light of the subsequent clarifications issued by the State Government. When the State Government, subsequently, has decided to confer seniority to all the fixed pay employees from their date of joining, the respondents cannot be discriminated, in absence of specific clarification, treating them a specific class of employees, and barring them from the applicability of the policy decisions.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined

22. It is also settled legal precedent, that even if an employee loses his seniority on request transfer, he/she cannot be denied the benefit of higher pay scale or promotion on the loss of his seniority. The service rendered by an employee is not wiped-out on his loss of seniority. (vide State of Maharashtra Vs. Uttam Vishnu Pawar, 2008 (2) SCC 646). Thus, even if there is loss of seniority of the respondents, the same will have no impact on the promotion of the respondents to the higher post of Deputy Mamlatdar. The learned Single Judge while passing the impugned judgment and order has considered the said decision.

23. It is also noticed by us that in cases of similarly situated employees to that of the respondents, i.e. Revenue Talatis and Revenue Clerks, the writ petitions filed by them against the appellant-Revenue Department being Special Civil Applications no.16298 of 2018 and 16847 of 2018 on similar issue based on the similar policies, this Court allowed the same by judgment dated 11th July, 2022. Letters Patent Appeals No.29 of 2024 and allied matters were dismissed by the order dated 21st February, 2025. The judgment and order passed by this Courts are implemented by the appellant- Department. Hence, the present appeal will also meet the same fate. The issue of non-joining of the other employees in the writ petitions was not raised before the learned Single Judge and also in other matters. In the present case, the State has already implemented the directions issued by the learned Single Judge subject to result of the present appeal. Subsequently, by the order dated 31st July, 2023, the State Page 19 of 20 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 23:46:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/32/2024 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined Government, Revenue Department has also conferred the benefit of promotion to 1695 Revenue Clerks and Revenue Talaties belonging to all Districts. All of them are informed about the pendency of the proceedings before this Court. No one has come forward to be joined as a party in any of the proceedings. Even otherwise, the State has uniformly applied the policies in case of all fixed pay employees, including fixed pay employees of the appellant-Revenue Department. Hence, we are not inclined to quash the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge on this ground in light of the aforesaid facts.

24. Thus, the present appeal fails and the same is dismissed. The judgment dated 22nd July, 2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application no.2160 of 2019 is hereby confirmed.

25. In view of the dismissal of the Letters Patent Appeal, connected Civil Application also stands disposed of.

Sd/-

(A. S. SUPEHIA, J.) Sd/-

(NISHA M. THAKORE, J.) AMAR RATHOD...