Gujarat High Court
District Development Officer, Navsari vs Nilesh Chhaganlal Solanki on 20 February, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia, Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/320/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 320 of 2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7984 of 2023
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 320 of 2025
=============================================
DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, NAVSARI & ANR.
Versus
NILESH CHHAGANLAL SOLANKI & ANR.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR. HJ KARATHIYA(7012) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MS NIRALI SARDA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR PA JADEJA(3726) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 20/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. ADMIT. Learned advocates appear and waive service of notice of admission on behalf of the respective respondents.
2. With consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for today, since the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties have submitted that the issue is no more res integra, as the Coordinate Bench of this Court has dismissed the Review Application filed by the local bodies. One of the order passed by the Coordinate Bench is dated 17.02.2025 passed in the Civil Application (for Condonation of Delay) No.5711 of 2024 in F/Misc. Civil Application No.33400 of 2024. Thus, it is submitted that in light of the aforesaid order, the present appeal may also be disposed of.
Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by MAHESH OMPRAKASH BHATI(HC01086) on Thu Feb 20 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 20 22:32:42 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/320/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/02/2025 undefined
3. The present appeal emanates from the order dated 24.07.2024 passed in the captioned writ petition, wherein the learned Single Judge has allowed the same by considering the earlier round of litigation between the respondent-employee and the State Government. The learned Single Judge in paragraph Nos.7 and 8, has observed thus : -
"7. This Court, while passing the order dated 23.01.2019 in Special Civil Application No.2207 of 2014, has clearly directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization from the initial date of appointment and there is no ambiguity in this direction. It was further directed that all consequential benefits also have to be paid from the said date. In the present case, it is not disputed that the petitioner was appointed on 11.11.2003. Therefore, in terms of the said order dated 23.01.2019, the petitioner's consequential benefits have to be considered and calculated from the initial date of appointment. In view thereof, it was not open for the State Government to put the petitioner on fixed pay basis for first five years from 11.11.2003 to 11.11.2008 and thereafter, grant the benefit of the regular pay-scale. The said order dated 23.01.2019 in Special Civil Application No.2207 of 2014 is thereafter confirmed by the learned Division Bench by the order dated 29.11.2021 in Letters Patent Appeal No.1418 of 2019 which has been further confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.25335 of 2023 by the order dated 05.02.2024, whereby the Special Leave Petition has been dismissed.
8. In view of the aforesaid observations, the present Special Civil Application is allowed. The impugned order and communication dated 17.06.2022 passed by the respondent No.2 is set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization from the initial date of appointment, i. e. 11.11.2003 and all consequential financial benefits shall also be calculated from the said date as if the petitioner was in regular pay-scale from the date of appointment. The said exercise shall be completed and payment of arrears shall be done within eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order, failing which, the said amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum till the date of actual payment. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs."Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by MAHESH OMPRAKASH BHATI(HC01086) on Thu Feb 20 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 20 22:32:42 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/320/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/02/2025 undefined
3. Thereafter, it appears that on an identical issue, there are numerous writ petitions and Letters Patent Appeals, which were filed before this Court and subsequently, review applications were also filed on such decisions of the Division Bench by the local bodies. Since there was delay in filing the review application, the Coordinate Bench, by the order dated 17.01.2025 passed in an identical issue in Civil Application (for Condonation of Delay) No.5711 of 2024, has pleased to reject such application by observing thus : -
"5. It is also an admitted fact of the matter that all the original petitioners/respondents herein, who were initially appointed on contractual basis for a period of eight years and worked continuously for the said period with artificial breaks between the year 2003-2011, had participated in the direct recruitment exercise conducted pursuant to the Recruitment Rules, 2011 and they were granted appointment on a fixed pay for five years after selection which they had completed successfully till the year 2017 before they were absorbed in the regular pay scale.
6. The insistence of the learned counsel for the review applicant is that with the absorption of the original petitioners in the year 2017 on the regular post in terms of the Government Resolution dated 16.02.2006 and providing them the regular pay scale after direct recruitment, they cannot be granted the benefit of continuity of service since the inception of their appointment. The submission is that the benefit of the contractual service, which was with artificial breaks, cannot be granted to the original petitioners and their appointments on regular basis is to be considered from the date of their regularization/absorption in the regular pay scale.
7. The submission is found wholly misconceived, for the simple reason that there is no dispute about the facts of the present case that all the original petitioners/respondents herein were initially engaged on contractual basis in the year 2003 and while continuing on the substantive post of Multi-purpose Health Worker (Male) Class-III (Panchayat Service), they have undergone the selection process and have been selected to the said post in terms of the Recruitment Rules, 2011.Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by MAHESH OMPRAKASH BHATI(HC01086) on Thu Feb 20 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 20 22:32:42 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/320/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/02/2025 undefined
8. This is the reason which we have already expressed in the judgment and order dated 23.04.2024 while dismissing the Letters Patent Appeal upholding the judgment and order dated 05.05.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge."
4. Thus, in light of the aforesaid orders and looking to the earlier round of litigation, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Hence, the present appeal stands dismissed.
5. The connected civil application also stands disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) Sd/-
(GITA GOPI,J) MAHESH/08 Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by MAHESH OMPRAKASH BHATI(HC01086) on Thu Feb 20 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 20 22:32:42 IST 2025