Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Gujarat Rajya Nivrut Karmachari ... on 20 January, 2025
Author: A. S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia, Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/334/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 334 of
2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1082 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 335 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1101 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 336 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 534 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 337 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 929 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 338 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 675 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 339 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 950 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 340 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1073 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 341 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1078 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 342 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 469 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 343 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1005 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 344 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1018 of 2025
With
Page 1 of 8
Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Fri Jan 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 27 21:17:37 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/334/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/01/2025
undefined
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 345 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 781 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 346 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 532 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 347 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1099 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 348 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 966 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 349 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1007 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 350 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1097 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 351 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 793 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 352 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 920 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 353 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1081 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 354 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1093 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 355 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 538 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 356 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 958 of 2025
Page 2 of 8
Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Fri Jan 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 27 21:17:37 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/334/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/01/2025
undefined
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 357 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 678 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 358 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 985 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 359 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1014 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 360 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 952 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 361 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1037 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 362 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 954 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 363 of 2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1044 of 2025
================================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
Versus
GUJARAT RAJYA NIVRUT KARMACHARI SAKHAVATI MAHAMANDAL
================================================================
Appearance:
IN CA NOS.334, 335, 336, 337 & 338 OF 2025 : MR. JAY TRIVEDI, AGP for
the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
IN CA NOS.339, 340, 341, 342 & 343 OF 2025 : MR. SIDDHARTH RAMI,
AGP for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
IN CA NOS.344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351, 352 & 353 OF 2025 : MR.
ADITYA PATHAK, AGP for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
IN CA NOS.354, 355, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361, 362 & 363 OF 2025 : MS.
DHARITRI PANCHOLI, AGP for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR AS ASTHAVADI(3698) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Page 3 of 8
Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Fri Jan 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 27 21:17:37 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/334/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/01/2025
undefined
Date : 20/01/2025
COMMON ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. The present applications are filed seeking condonation of delay as mentioned in each of the Civil Applications in the captioned appeals.
2. At the outset, learned AGP's have submitted that in various appeals after condoning the delay of similar nature, the appeals are disposed of in light of the order of the Supreme Court dated 11.04.2023 passed in Civil Appeal No.2471 of 2023. Learned AGP's have submitted that in most of the matters, learned advocates appearing for the respective parties had consented for condoning the delay and ultimately, had agreed that the order may be passed in the present appeals in light of the order passed by the Supreme Court. It is also submitted that in fact, the entire issue was before the Supreme Court and thereafter, in view of dismissal of some of the Letters Patent Appeals filed by the State, the policy was also framed by the State Government regulating the issue of grant of one increment. It is submitted that ultimately, when the Supreme Court has clarified in the order dated 11.04.2023 relating to grant of one increment to the employees similarly situated to the opponent, the Litigation Committee, which was formed by the State Government, had undertaken necessary exercise to see that the Letters Patent Appeals are filed. Learned AGP's have referred to the averments made in Paragraph No.3 of the applications and also referred to the time line of the litigation before this Court. Thus, it is urged that the delay may be condoned and the same order may be passed as was passed by this Court in various other group of matters.
Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Fri Jan 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 27 21:17:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/334/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/01/2025 undefined 3. Per contra, learned advocate/s for the opponent/s has
vehemently opposed the present applications seeking condonation of delay. It is submitted that the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge has become final. Hence, the delay may not be condoned.
4. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.
5. It is an established fact that there are various Writ Petitions filed by numerous employees after the judgment was rendered by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.10308 of 2021 dated 11.08.2021. It is also not in dispute that in various High Courts of the country, such issue about grant of one increment accruing on 1st July to its employees and who had retired on 30 th June, was raised and examined by different High Courts. Ultimately, the Supreme Court in the judgment in the case of Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL and Others v. C.P. Mundinamani and Others, dated 11.04.2023, disposed of the Special Leave Petition on identical issue.
6. It appears that thereafter, a review application was filed before the Supreme Court on the very said judgment being Misc. Civil Application (Diary) No.2400 of 2024 in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.4722 of 2021. By the order dated 06.09.2024, the Supreme Court again clarified with regard to entitlement of one increment to such employees who are similarly situated to the opponent.
Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Fri Jan 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 27 21:17:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/334/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/01/2025 undefined 7. The Supreme Court has held thus:-
"The issue raised in the present applications requires consideration, insofar as the date of applicability of the judgment dated 11.04.2023 in Civil Appeal No. 2471/2023, titled "Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL and Others v. C.P. Mundinamani and Others", to third parties is concerned.
We are informed that a large number of fresh writ petitions have been filed.
To prevent any further litigation and confusion, by of an interim order we direct that:
(a) The judgment dated 11.04.2023 will be given effect to in case of third parties from the date of the judgment, that is, the pension by taking into account one increment will be payable on and after 01.05.2023. Enhanced pension for the period prior to 31.04.2023 will not be paid.
(b) For persons who have filed writ petitions and succeeded, the directions given in the said judgment will operate as res judicata, and accordingly, an enhanced pension by taking one increment would have to be paid.
(c) The direction in (b) will not apply, where the judgment has not attained finality, and cases where an appeal has been preferred, or if filed, is entertained by the appellate court.
(d) In case any retired employee has filed any application for intervention/impleadment in Civil Appeal No. 3933/2023 or any other writ petition and a beneficial order has been passed, the enhanced pension by including one increment will be payable from the month in which the application for intervention/impleadment was filed. This interim order will continue till further orders of this Court. However, no person who has already received an enhanced pension including arrears, will be affected by the directions in (a), (c) and
(d)."
8. In the meantime, the State Government, on dismissal of the Special Leave Petition, had also framed policy regulating grant of one increment in line of the earlier order passed by the Supreme Court. However, when the recent order dated 06.09.2024 was passed by the Supreme Court clarifying its earlier order, the State Government has withdrawn the policy.
Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Fri Jan 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 27 21:17:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/334/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/01/2025 undefined
9. It is also not in dispute that the learned Single Judge as well as the Division Benches have placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of C.P. Mundinamani (supra) for taking similar view.
10. In light of subsequent development, the State Government has filed the present applications seeking condonation of delay in filing the Letters Patent Appeal on the order passed by the learned Single Judge. We have noticed that there are numerous Letters Patent Appeals filed either by the State Government or by various bodies of the State Government on the basis of the order passed by the Supreme Court. As and when such applications were filed in various Letters Patent Appeals, in fact, the learned advocate for the opponent-employees have consented for condonation of delay and accordingly, numerous Letters Patent Appeals were disposed of in line of the order dated 06.09.2024 passed by the Supreme Court in the review application in case of C.P. Mundinamani (supra).
11. The aforesaid fact is not denied by the opponent/s that in identical facts and on the similar judgments, this Court has entertained the application seeking condonation of delay the Letters Patent Appeals have been disposed. For brevity, we are not inclined to refer to the numbers of such Appeals.
12. Thus, in order to see that uniformity is maintained in all such cases and all the employees are treated at par with the directions issued by the Supreme Court, we are inclined to condone the delay as mentioned in each of the applications in preferring the Letters Patent Appeal. The same are hereby condoned. Accordingly, the Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Fri Jan 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 27 21:17:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/334/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/01/2025 undefined present applications are allowed. Registry is directed to give regular number to the Letters Patent Appeals and list the same today.
Sd/-
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) Sd/-
(GITA GOPI, J) CAROLINE / SB-1 # 5 to # 34 Page 8 of 8 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Fri Jan 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 27 21:17:37 IST 2025