Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat Through Secretary ... vs Ramkundiben Wd/O Hirabhai Malivad on 8 December, 2025
Author: Bhargav D. Karia
Bench: Bhargav D. Karia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1285/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1285 of 2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 60 of 2021
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1285 of 2025
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF
FOREST & ORS.
Versus
RAMKUNDIBEN WD/O HIRABHAI MALIVAD
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS SHRUTI DHRUVE, AGP for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
PRABHATSINH J PARMAR(7996) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA
Date : 08/12/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA)
1. Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Shruti Dhruve for the appellants.
2. By this appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act, the appellants Page 1 of 12 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Wed Dec 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 15 20:32:35 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1285/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 undefined original respondents have challenged the judgment and order dated 03.02.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge allowing the petition for family pension to the respondent-original petitioner.
3. Brief facts of the case are that husband of the respondent late Shri Hirabhai Malivad was employed as daily wager Class-IV employee with the appellants. Husband of the respondent expired on 19.06.2010 during the service period and therefore, respondent made a representation dated 12.07.2016 requesting to give pension. Respondent also preferred Special Civil Application No.15308 of 2016 before this Court, wherein this Court vide order dated 19.09.2019 directed the appellants to examine the case of the Page 2 of 12 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Wed Dec 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 15 20:32:35 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1285/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 undefined husband of the respondent for pension.
4. When the case of the respondent was not examined by the appellants, the respondent sent notice dated 21.03.2020 to the appellants seeking compliance of the order.
5. Appellants vide letter dated 03.07.2020 replied to the respondent stating that the respondent was not entitled for pension giving the reason that respondent has not completed 10 years of service.
6. The respondent thereafter made representation dated 30.07.2020 to reconsider the decision of the appellant dated 03.07.2020 denying the benefit of Page 3 of 12 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Wed Dec 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 15 20:32:35 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1285/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 undefined pension to the respondent.
7. The appellant vide reply dated 11.08.2020 reiterated its earlier stand.
8. Being aggrieved by the said reply, the respondent preferred Special Civil Application No.60 of 2021 before this Court. Learned Single Judge vide impugned order dated 03.02.2025 allowed the petition and directed the appellants herein to calculate the amount of family pension from the date on which the husband of the respondent died and to pay the same to the respondent as per his eligibility within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order by taking into consideration the facts in respect of similarly situated person. Page 4 of 12 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Wed Dec 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 15 20:32:35 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1285/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 undefined
9. Being aggrieved by the order passed by learned Single Judge, the appellant State has preferred the present appeal.
10. It is the case of the appellants that the husband of the respondent - original petitioner did not complete 10 years of continuous service as he has worked for less than 300 days from the year 1991-1992 to 2004-2005 and therefore, the respondent was not entitled to the family pension.
11. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Shruti Dhruve appearing for the appellants invited the attention of the Court to the chart of number of days worked by the husband of the respondent which is placed on record at page 50 of Page 5 of 12 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Wed Dec 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 15 20:32:35 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1285/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 undefined the paper book which reads as under:
તારીજ રોજમદારની વિ ગત દર્શાા તુ પત્રક રોજમદારનું નામઃ- શ્રી હિ રકાભાઈ મખલાભાઈ માલી ાડ જન્મ તારીખઃ- ૦૧/૦૬/૬૮ પ્રથમ કામ પર જોડાયા તારીખઃ- ૦૧/૦૪/૯૨ ર્શાૈક્ષવિ.ક લાયકાતઃ- ૫ પાસ અ.નં. ખાતામાં દાખલ તારીખથી કુ લ રોજ કામગીરીની કામનું સ્થળ હિદ સોની રીમાકસ ર્ષ ગ. ું ર્ષ ાઈઝ વિ ગત સંખ્યા તારીજ ૧ ૪-૧૯૯૨ ૩-૧૯૯૩ ૩૦૦ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૩૦૦ મુજબ મુજબ ૨ ૪-૧૯૯૩ ૩-૧૯૯૪ ૨૬૪ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૨૬૪ મુજબ મુજબ ૩ ૪-૧૯૯૪ ૩-૧૯૯૫ ૨૮૨ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૨૮૨ મુજબ મુજબ ૪ ૪-૧૯૯૫ ૩-૧૯૯૬ ૨૪૦ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૨૪૦ મુજબ મુજબ ૫ ૪-૧૯૯૬ ૩-૧૯૯૭ ૨૨૬ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૨૨૬ મુજબ મુજબ ૬ ૪-૧૯૯૭ ૩-૧૯૯૮ ૨૬૦ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૨૬૦ મુજબ મુજબ ૭ ૪-૧૯૯૮ ૩-૧૯૯૯ ૨૩૬ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૨૩૬ મુજબ મુજબ ૮ ૪-૧૯૯૯ ૩-૨૦૦૦ ૨૨૮ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૨૨૮ મુજબ મુજબ ૯ ૪-૨૦૦૦ ૩-૨૦૦૧ ૧૯૦ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૧૯૦ મુજબ મુજબ ૧૦ ૪-૨૦૦૧ ૩-૨૦૦૨ ૨૨૮ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૨૨૮ મુજબ મુજબ ૧૧ ૪-૨૦૦૨ ૩-૨૦૦૩ ૨૨૮ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૨૨૮ મુજબ મુજબ ૧૨ ૪-૨૦૦૩ ૩-૨૦૦૪ ૨૨૦ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૨૨૦ Page 6 of 12 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Wed Dec 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 15 20:32:35 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1285/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 undefined મુજબ મુજબ ૧૩ ૪-૨૦૦૪ ૩-૨૦૦૫ ૨૧૬ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૨૧૬ મુજબ મુજબ ૧૪ ૪-૨૦૦૫ ૩-૨૦૦૬ ૧૯૮ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૧૯૮ મુજબ મુજબ ૧૫ ૪-૨૦૦૬ ૩-૨૦૦૭ ૨૧૬ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૨૧૬ મુજબ મુજબ ૧૬ ૪-૨૦૦૭ ૩-૨૦૦૮ ૨૧૬ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૨૧૬ મુજબ મુજબ ૧૭ ૪-૨૦૦૮ ૩-૨૦૦૯ ૨૧૬ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૨૧૬ મુજબ મુજબ ૧૮ ૪-૨૦૦૯ ૩-૨૦૧૦ ૨૧૬ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૨૧૬ મુજબ મુજબ ૧૯ ૪-૨૦૧૦ ૪-૨૦૧૦ ૧૮ પત્રક નંબર-૫ પત્રક નંબર-૫ ૧૮ મુજબ મુજબ
12. Learned AGP Ms. Dhruve also referred to the averments made in the affidavit-in- reply filed in the petition which reads as under:
"10. Further, as per GR dated 21.06.2019, a worker is eligible for old pension scheme only if a period of 10 years of continuous service is completed on 01.04.2005. considering the service of the husband of the petitioner, he is not entitled to receive this benefit as he had not completed the 10 years of continuous service as on the cut Page 7 of 12 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Wed Dec 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 15 20:32:35 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1285/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 undefined off date. The GR has been attached hereto and marked as Annexure R2.
11. The Government Resolution dated 15.09.2014, clearly specifies that in order to be eligible to receive benefits of the new pension scheme, a period of five years or more continuous service is to be completed on or after 29.10.2010. The husband of the petitioner passed away on 19.06.2010 and thus, considering the eligibility, the same is not entitled for new Government pension scheme. The Government Resolution dated 15.09.2014 is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE R 3."
13. Learned Single Judge after considering the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Workmen of American Express International Banking Corporation v. Management of American Express International Banking Corporation reported in 1985(4) SCC 71 held that to calculate the number of working days, holidays like Saturday,Sunday and public holidays are Page 8 of 12 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Wed Dec 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 15 20:32:35 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1285/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 undefined required to be considered to count 240 days in a year and relying upon the said decision, it was held as under :
"8. I have heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the record. Along with affidavit-in-reply, the respondents have produced a chart at page No.50, the chart indicates that in the year 1992 husband of the petitioner has worked for 300 days and from 1993 till 2009, the petitioner has worked for more than 200 days except in the year 2000 where the petitioner's husband worked for 190 days. In the year 2010, the husband of the petitioner who died on 19.6.2010 had worked for 18 days but that is not of much relevance for the reason that the petitioner's entire claim is based on the fact that the petitioner has, for ten continuous years, served for more than 240 days, in view of decision of American Express International Banking Corporation (Supra) by counting the Saturday, Sunday and other public holidays as if the petitioner has worked.
8.1 As the chart indicating the petitioner's number of days work does not indicate that whether the Page 9 of 12 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Wed Dec 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 15 20:32:35 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1285/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 undefined respondents have considered Saturday, Sunday and public Holidays or not, pursuant to a query learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Krina Calla, submitted that in the above calculation only actual number of working days are included and not total number of days including Saturday, Sunday and public Holidays are considered while preparing the above chart.
8.2 If on the basis of chart produced by the respondents even fifty Sundays are added, then the husband of the petitioner has worked for more than 240 days as the least number of days the husband of the petitioner has worked is 190 in the year 2000."
14. Learned Single Judge has also referred to and relied upon the decision of Division Bench of this Court in case of Surendranagar Panchayat and others v. Umarkhan Alikhan Malek and others (Order dated 29.03.2016 in Letters Patent Appeal No.2047 of 2004) rendered in similar facts.
Page 10 of 12 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Wed Dec 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 15 20:32:35 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1285/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 undefined
15. The Learned Single Judge has rightly not accepted the number of days worked out by the appellant exclusive of holidays of Saturday and Sunday and therefore, it is rightly held that the husband of the respondent worked for more than 240 days as per the chart reproduced above.
16. On perusal of the chart, it is clear that the husband of the respondent worked for more than 240 days by including Saturday and Sunday in each year. Therefore, it cannot be said that respondent workman has not worked for 10 continuous years so as to deprive the benefits of pension/family pension to the respondent.
Page 11 of 12 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Wed Dec 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 15 20:32:35 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1285/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 undefined
17. Learned AGP Ms. Dhruve also referred to and relied upon the Government Resolution dated 15.09.2014 at Annexure-R/ 3 (page-59 of the paper book) however, said Government Resolution is issued after the death of husband of the respondent as averred in para 11 reproduced here-in- above and therefore, in our opinion, same is not applicable to the facts of the case.
18. In view of foregoing reasons, appeal is dismissed. Civil Application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) (L. S. PIRZADA, J) RAGHUNATH R NAIR Page 12 of 12 Uploaded by RAGHUNATH R NAIR(HC00196) on Wed Dec 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 15 20:32:35 IST 2025