Gujarat High Court
Chandrakant Karshanbhai Zala vs State Of Gujarat on 22 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/105/2020 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 105 of 2020
==========================================================
CHANDRAKANT KARSHANBHAI ZALA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VAIBHAV A VYAS(2896) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR PARTH PATEL, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 - State
LAW OFFICER BRANCH(420) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR R.D. KINARIWALA(6146) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 22/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner with the following main prayers.
"8(A) Direct the respondent authorities to grant promotion to the petitioner to the post of Deputy Registrar with deemed date of promotion w.e.f. 13.08.2015, i.e. the date on which the persons junior to the petitioner came to be promoted to the said post and grant all consequential benefits including the arrears of pay and allowances, with interest at the rate which the Honourable Court may consider as just and proper;
(B) Direct the respondent authorities to grant the benefit of Shetty Pay Commission to the Page 1 of 15 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:12:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/105/2020 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined petitioner as per the entitlement of the petitioner and grant the consequential benefits including the arrears of pay and allowances, with interest at the rate which the Honourable Court may consider just and proper;"
2. The brief facts of the case are as under :
2.1 The petitioner came to be appointed as English Section Writer on 06.12.1983 and was posted at the Court of Principal Civil Judge, Dhrol - Jamnagar.
2.2 Due to closure of the said Court, the petitioner was relieved from service on 01.10.1985.
2.3 The petitioner was issued fresh appointment order on 05.02.1986 and was posted in the Court of Principal Civil Judge, Dwarka.
2.4 Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted as Junior Clerk in the year 1987.
2.5 A charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner on 17.06.1997 for the alleged misconduct i.e. misappropriation of money and departmental inquiry was initiated by the authorities.Page 2 of 15 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:12:09 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/105/2020 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined 2.7 With regard to the very charges, a criminal case was constituted against the petitioner being Criminal Appeal No.876 of 1997, where charges for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 466, 467 read with 468, 471, 477A and 120B of the IPC were alleged.
2.8 The petitioner was exonerated from the charges levelled against him vide order dated 31.07.2000 in the departmental proceeding.
2.9 He was promoted as Senior Clerk (Superintendent) on 20.09.2006.
2.10 During the pendency of the criminal proceeding, the persons junior to the petitioner came to be promoted to the next higher post vide order dated 13.08.2015, wherein it was specifically stated that the said promotions are subject to seniority of the petitioner as per the outcome of the criminal case pending against him.
2.11 Since he was not promoted for the post of Deputy Registrar, he has made a representation to the respondent authority on 28.10.2015.
2.14 Pursuant to the said representation, the respondent authorities vide communication dated 08.02.2016 denied the Page 3 of 15 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:12:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/105/2020 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined promotion to the petitioner on the ground of pendency of criminal prosecution and his case can be considered after conclusion of the said criminal case.
2.13 Respondent No.1 - State has issued GR on 29.10.2015 and implemented the recommendations of the Shetty Pay Commissioner for non-judicial staff of the subordinate Court of the State w.e.f. 01.04.2003. 2.14 The Advisory Committee of respondent No.2 held on 29.03.2016 denied the promotion to the petitioner. 2.15 Thereafter, as per the recommendations of the Shetty Pay Commission, the benefits of revised pay-scales were granted to all the employees working in the Subordinate Courts vide order dated 11.04.2016 by the respondent authorities.
2.16 The petitioner was denied the said benefits. Therefore, he has made a representation to the respondent authorities on 21.04.2016 for the same, which was filed by the respondent authorities and accordingly, informed the petitioner on 19.05.2016.
2.17 The petitioner made a representation to the respondent authorities on 12.07.2016 relying upon the GR Page 4 of 15 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:12:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/105/2020 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined dated 14.06.2016.
2.18 The petitioner was acquitted by the competent Criminal Court vide judgment dated 27.03.2018. 2.19 After that order of acquittal, the petitioner made a representation to the respondent authorities on 30.03.2018 and thereby requested for promotion to the post of Deputy Registrar / Head Clerk with deemed date. He has also requested the respondent authorities that the benefits of Shetty Pay Commissioner may also be given to him. 2.20 On 06.04.2018, the petitioner has made an application to the respondent authorities and requested for the benefits of revised pay-scale as per the recommendations of the Shetty Pay Commission. By the very application, the petitioner has 'not pressed' his right for promotion which were given to other employees by the respondent authorities vide order dated 13.08.2015.
2.21 The meeting of the Advisory Committee of respondent No.2 was held on 25.04.2018 and reviewed the application and undertaking of the petitioner. 2.22 Pursuant to the decision of the said Committee, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Bench Clerk, Page 5 of 15 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:12:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/105/2020 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined Class-II on 27.04.2018.
2.23 The petitioner has retired from service on 30.04.2018 on attaining the age of superannuation. 2.24 After the retirement, the petitioner has made an application on 20.09.2018 to the respondent authorities for giving benefits of revised pay-scale recommended by the Shetty Pay Commission.
2.25 The petitioner was informed by the respondent authority vide communication dated 15.02.2019 that his application dated 20.09.2018 is filed on the ground that he is granted the benefit as per the Jun-Judicial Staff Recruitment and Conditions of Services Rules, 2017 framed by the High Court of Gujarat.
2.26 On 09.04.2019, the petitioner made an application to provide a copy of the decision taken by the Advisory Committee.
2.27 The respondent authorities has replied vide communication dated 22.04.2019 that the said copy need not be provided to the petitioner.
2.28 In these facts, this petition is heard and decided Page 6 of 15 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:12:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/105/2020 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined by this Court today, with consent of the learned advocates.
3. Heard learned advocates. Rule returnable forthwith. 4.1 Learned advocate Mr.Vaibhav Vyas for the petitioner has submitted that the action of the respondent authorities of not granting the benefit of promotion to the petitioner to the post of Deputy Registrar with deemed date of promotion is absolutely illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory, in view of the clarification made in the promotion order of the juniors to the petitioner dated 13.08.2015; and that the action of not granting the benefit of Shetty Pay Commissioner which is granted to the other non- judicial staff working in the subordinate judicial is arbitrary; and that in view of the exoneration of the petitioner from the departmental inquiry as well as in the criminal prosecution, the petitioner is entitled to all the consequential benefits including the benefit of promotion with deemed date of promotion as well as the benefit of the recommendations of the Shetty Pay Commission from the ate of his entitlement as per the policy of the respondent authorities; and that even the proceedings of the Advisory Committee, it is specifically recorded by the Departmental Promotion Committee that the promotions are granted to the juniors of the petitioner subject to seniority of the petitioner, as Page 7 of 15 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:12:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/105/2020 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined criminal proceeding was pending against him and therefore, upon acquittal, the advice of the Departmental Promotion Committee is required to be acted upon; and that the benefit of deemed date of promotion is not granted to the petitioner. He has submitted that this petition may be allowed. 4.2 In support of his submissions, he has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India versus K.V. Jankiraman reported in (1991) 4 SCC 109, more particularly paras : 26 and 34 thereof, which read as under :
5.1 Per contra, learned advocate Mr. R.D. Kinariwala for respondent No.2 has vehemently opposed this petition. He has drawn the attention of this Court towards the affidavit in reply filed by respondent No.2 and has submitted that the present petition is filed by the petitioner after executing an undertaking dated 06.04.2018 as well as after obtaining the benefits of Shetty Pay Commission as per the order dated 27.04.2018; and that respondent No2 has considered the application of the petitioner dated 06.04.2018 and thereby granted the benefits which are available to him; and that after pocketing the said benefits, the present petition si filed by the petitioner with such prayers, which would not be entertained by this Court; and that the State has filed an Page 8 of 15 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:12:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/105/2020 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined appeal before the higher forum and is still pending for adjudication; and that the petitioner was given promotion considering the recommendations of Shetty Pay Commissioner to the post of Deputy Registrar on 27.04.2018; and that the promotional post got vacated only on 01.04.2018 and therefore, the promotion was given to the petitioner in April, 2018; and that since the State has filed an appeal against the order of acquittal and is pending before the higher forum, the petitioner is not entitled to all the consequential benefits including the benefits of promotion with deemed date of promotion as well as the benefits of recommendation of Shetty Pay Commissioner from the date of his entitlement. He has submitted that this petition may be dismissed. 5.2 In support of his submissions, he has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of R.Veerabhadram versus Government of A.P. reported in (1999) 9 SCC 43, more particularly para : 10 thereof.
6. Learned AGP Mr.Patel for the State has submitted that as such, there is no role of respondent No.1 in the departmental promotion process as well as departmental inquiry proceedings qua the petitioner. He has submitted that the State has played its role by challenging the order of Page 9 of 15 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:12:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/105/2020 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined acquittal passed by the competent Criminal Court before the higher forum and is pending for adjudication. He has submitted that no interference be made by this Court. He has submitted that this petition may be dismissed. 7.1 I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned advocates for the respective parties. I have perused the documents available on record. From the record, it transpires that the controversy revolves around the : (i) grant of promotion (ii) with deemed date i.e. w.e.f. 13.08.2015
(iii) grant benefits of Shetty Pay Commission and (iv) grant all consequential benefits including the arrears of pay and allowances, with interest.
7.2.1 At this stage, reference needs to be made to the application dated 06.04.2018 made by the petitioner himself before respondent No.2, more particularly para : 2 thereof, which is quoted as under.
"2. I hereby undertake to 'not press' my application for getting promotion w.e.f. 13.08.2015 mentioned in reference No.2 above, if my application for Shetty Pay Commission is granted as I am giving priority to my application of Shetty Pay Commission."Page 10 of 15 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:12:09 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/105/2020 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined 7.2.2 From the above, it transpires that there are two parts of his request; firstly, he waived his right for promotion with effect from 13.05.2018 and secondly, he claimed for the benefits of Shetty Pay Commission with effect from his entitlement.
7.2.3 Under the circumstances, the petitioner himself has waived his right for the promotion w.e.f. 13.05.2018 i.e. from the date of his juniors get promotion, by his own application dated 06.04.2018 noted above. Considering the same, the Advisory Committee has taken a decision to give promotion to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner was promoted on 27.04.2018 to the post of Bench Clerk, Class-II in the pay- scale of Rs.9300-34800 (Grade Pay Rs.4,200/-) by giving benefits of Shetty Pay Commission.
7.2.4 It is required to be noted that the petitioner has reached the age of superannuation on 30.04.2018 and thus, retired on that date.
7.2.5 Further, the promotional post, on which the petitioner got promotion, got vacant on 01.04.2018 only. Prior to that, there was no such post available with the respondent authorities on which the petitioner could be promoted. The Committee has considered the Non-Judicial Officers and Staff Page 11 of 15 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:12:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/105/2020 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined of the Courts (Recruitment and Conditions of Services) Rules, 2017 while considering the case of the petitioner. Such rules speak for eligibility and entitlement of the employees for promotion. The respondent authorities has given the benefits of Shetty Pay Commission to the petitioner. 7.3.1 In view of above, the question of giving promotion to the petitioner need not be decided as the petitioner was already promoted on 27.04.2018.
7.3.2 The another questions that it would be 'w.e.f. 13.08.2015' and with deemed date, need not be decided as the petitioner himself has waived off his right vide his application dated 06.04.2018. Therefore, the said questions also need not be decided.
7.3.3 The respondent authorities has extended the benefits of Shetty Pay Commission while considering his case for promotion to the post of Bench Clerk, Class-II and therefore, the same need not be decided any further. 7.3.4 The question of granting all consequential benefits including the arrears of pay and allowances, with interest need not be decided as the petitioner himself has waived off his right and the respondent authorities have considered the case of the petitioner and granted promotion on 27.04.2018 as Page 12 of 15 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:12:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/105/2020 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined he would be retiring on 30.04.2018.
7.4 At this stage, it would be fruitful to refer to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of R. Veerabhadram versus Government of A.P. reported in (1999) 9 SCC 43, more particularly, para : 10 thereof, which reads as under.
"10. It is next contended that the appellant should be granted a deemed promotion to the post of Joint Secretary prior to his retirement. The promotion to the post of Joint Secretary is a promotion by selection and not by seniority. The appellant, therefore, cannot claim any promotion from the date on which his junior was promoted, since the basis for promotion is selection and not seniority. The appellant, however, has relied upon a decision of this Court in Sulekh Chand & Salek Chand V/s. Commissioner of Police, reported in 1994 Supp (3) SCC 674. In that case also, the appellant had been charged with an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act and he was kept under suspension. However, when his turn came for promotion, he was considered for promotion but he was promoted at a later date in view of the criminal proceedings which ultimately ended in his acquittal. The Court held that once there was an acquittal, he was entitled to reinstatement as if there were no blot on his Page 13 of 15 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:12:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/105/2020 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined service. The material on the basis of which his promotion was denied, did not now subsist and he should be promoted on the basis of the Departmental Promotion Committee's findings. In the present case the appellant was not considered for selection because of the pending criminal proceedings. Since the promotional post is a selection post, there is no basis on which he can now claim that he must be deemed to have been selected and hence he should be granted the promotion. There is no basis on which we can hold that he would have been selected when he was eligible for promotion. The decision, in the above case, has no application here. The only other Judgement on which the appellant relied, in this connection is the Judgement of the Rajasthan High Court in Mohan Singh Bhati V/s. State of Rajasthan, reported in (1998) 1 Serv LR 684, where the Court said that after acquittal, the respondent was entitled to reinstatement and all consequential monetary benefits. We fail to see how this decision will help the appellant in the present case. On the contrary, in the State of Mysore V/s. C.R. Seshadri, reported in (1974) 4 SCC 308 : (AIR 1974 SC 460 : 1974 Lab IC
362), this Court has held that if the Rule of promotion is one of sheer seniority, it may well be that promotion is a matter of course. On the other hand, if merit is the rule, promotion is problematical and it would be hazardous to Page 14 of 15 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:12:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/105/2020 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined assume that by efflux of time, the petitioner would have got the promotion. The Court cannot speculate in retrospect whether the petitioner would have been selected on merit and on the strength of such "dubious hypothesis" direct retro- active promotion and back pay."
7.5 Additionally, it is required to be noted that the appeal against the acquittal order preferred by the State is still pending before the higher forum and is awaiting final adjudication.
7.6 It is very surprising that on one hand, the petitioner has waived off his right vide application dated 06.04.2018 and got promotion on 27.04.2018 and on the other hand, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present petition. Be that as it may, this Court finds that the respondent authorities have rightly granted promotion to the petitioner considering the recommendations of the Shetty Pay Commission. There is no substance in this petition. This petition needs to be dismissed.
8. For the reasons recorded above, this petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J) M.H. DAVE Page 15 of 15 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:12:09 IST 2025