Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Dharmendrakumar Jodhraj Jain on 3 September, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/653/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 653 of 2016
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION/9343/2014
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
=============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
=============================================
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
Versus
DHARMENDRAKUMAR JODHRAJ JAIN & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MS VAISHNAVI VERMA, AGP for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR GM JOSHI, SENIOR ADVOCATE with
MR I.G. JOSHI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR.VARUN K.PATEL(3802) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
Date : 03/09/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. The matter requires consideration. Hence, ADMIT.
2. The present Letters Patent Appeal, filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act, 1865, is directed against the judgment and order dated 13.04.2015 passed by the learned Single Judge in the captioned writ petition, whereby the learned Single Judge, while allowing the petition, directed the authority to grant the leave salary for a period of 72 days.
Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by MAHESH OMPRAKASH BHATI(HC01086) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 22:48:39 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/653/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2025 undefined
3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Vaishnavi Verma, has submitted that respondent No.1, now deceased and represented by his legal heirs, is not entitled to any amount towards leave encashment, as the State Government has not approved the Rules of the Gujarat State Bharat Scouts and Guides, in which the deceased employee was serving. She has further submitted that the learned Single Judge erred in issuing such directions, as there exists no rule governing the grant of leave encashment to employees of the Gujarat State Bharat Scouts and Guides on par with State Government employees. It is, therefore, submitted that the present appeal may be allowed by setting aside the impugned judgment and order.
4. On the contrary, learned Senior Advocate Mr. G.M. Joshi, has submitted that the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge is just and proper and it does not warrant interference. It is submitted that the deceased-employee was also granted gratuity, and accordingly, he is entitled to the leave encashment amount as directed by the learned Single Judge. It is urged by him that the impugned judgment and order may be upheld.
5. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, at length.
6. It is not in dispute that the original petitioner, who passed away during the pendency of the present appeal, was an employee of the Gujarat State Bharat Scouts and Guides, which is not governed by the Rules applicable to State Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by MAHESH OMPRAKASH BHATI(HC01086) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 22:48:39 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/653/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2025 undefined Government employees.
7. It is also noticed by us that the entire case of the original petitioner was premised on the judgment dated 17.07.2013 passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No.16122 of 2005, wherein similarly situated employees of the Gujarat State Bharat Scouts and Guides, who claimed leave encashment and gratuity, were directed to make representations to the respondents. While the claim for leave encashment was ultimately rejected by the State Government and gratuity was granted.
8. Under these circumstances, in the absence of any Rules governing the grant of leave encashment to employees of the Gujarat State Bharat Scouts and Guides, the rules applicable to State Government employees cannot be directly applied to them. Hence, the present appeal succeeds. The same is allowed. The judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge is hereby quashed and set aside.
Sd/-
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) Sd/-
(R. T. VACHHANI, J) MAHESH/17 Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by MAHESH OMPRAKASH BHATI(HC01086) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 22:48:39 IST 2025