Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat Through Secretary vs J.J.Pandya on 18 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2861/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2861 of 2019
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS.
Versus
J.J.PANDYA & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS POOJA ASHAR, AGP for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MS VYOMA K JHAVERI(6386) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE NOT RECD BACK for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 18/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. This petition is filed for the following prayers:
"13(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS MAY BE PLEASED TO admit and allow this Special Civil Application. (B) YOUR LORDSHIPS MAY BE PLEASED TO quash and set aside the Judgment and Award dated 24.7.2018 passed by the Ld.Tribunal in Appeal No.71 of 2016. (C) Pending admission and final hearing of the Petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS MAY BE PLEASED TO stay, implementation, operation and execution of the Judgment and Award 24.7.2018 passed by the Ld.Tribunal in Appeal No.71 of 2016.
(D) xxxx"
2. This petition is filed by the State challenging the judgment and award dated 24.7.2018 passed by the Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 19 00:38:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2861/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2025 undefined Ld.Gujarat Civil Services Tribunal in Appeal No.71 of 2016 hereby the learned Tribunal has granted the higher pay scale to respondent no.1 herein with effect from 30.9.1990 instead of 13.3.2003 and further has also granted deemed promotion from 13.11.2003 to respondent no.1 herein.
3. Heard learned AGP Ms.Ashar for the petitioners and learned advocate Ms.Jhaveri for the respondent no.1.
4. Learned AGP has submitted that the crux of controversy in the present petition is that the respondent no.1 herein had cleared the departmental examination for the promotional post of Senior Clerk on 13.11.2003 and was accorded the benefits of first higher pay scale from the said date as per provision 3(5) and 3(9) of the Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994. However, the learned Tribunal has granted the benefit of the first higher pay scale from 30.9.1990 i.e. the date when the respondent no.1 had notionally completed 9 years of service and therefore this petition is filed. She submitted that as the respondent no.1 had cleared his first departmental promotion examination only on 13.11.2003 and therefore the learned Tribunal has erred in granting the higher pay scale from 30.9.1990 instead of 13.11.2003. She, therefore, submitted that this petition be allowed.
Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 19 00:38:22 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2861/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2025 undefined
5. Per contra, learned advocate for respondent no.1 has submitted that the respondent was appointed on contractual basis on 26.11.1979 and was discontinued vide order dated 29.11.1981; that the respondent was reinstated vide order dated 9.9.1993 passed by the learned Labour Court in Reference (LCR) No.855 of 1989; the said order was modified by this Court vide order dated 6.2.1995; the the respondent cleared the departmental examination in the yer 2003; that the respondent is not aware about the conduct of examination between year 1995 to 2003; that vide office order dated 25.2.2009, the services of the respondent no.1 were considered as continuity of service from 29.11.1981 to 19.9.1995; that the petitioner has retired on 30.6.2017; that the learned Tribunal has not committed any error in passing the impugned order. Hence, this petition be dismissed.
6. I have considered the rival submissions of the parties and also perused the material on record. It transpires from the record that the respondent had challenged the decision of the petitioner of granting the first higher pay scale from 13.7.2003 instead of 30.9.1990. The learned Tribunal has considered the rival submissions and position of law and has observed that the present respondent no.1 was not in service on 30.9.1981 but he was reinstated on 21.9.1995 and therefore it is obvious that the respondent no.1 did not get any opportunity to clear the departmental Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 19 00:38:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2861/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2025 undefined examination and that as the respondent no.1 passed the departmental examination in the year 2003 and therefore he cannot claim promotion as it is compulsory to pass the departmental examination for promotion; but the respondent no.1 is entitled for the higher grade pay scale from 30.9.1990 on completion of nine years as he was reinstated in service and was treated as continuous service. Even on going through the Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994 which is relied on by learned AGP for the petitioner, it transpires that the passing of departmental examination is required for actual promotion and not for higher grade pay scale. Therefore, when the respondent no.1 has completed the requisite service as he was reinstated in service and is having the continuous service, this Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned Tribunal.
7. Considering the over all facts and circumstances of the present case, this petition is deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, dismissed. Notice/Rule is discharged. As there is no interim relief granted in this petition, it is deemed that the amount which is required to be paid as per the impugned order of the Tribunal is paid. If not paid, the same be paid within a period of six weeks from the receipt of this order.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J) SRILATHA Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 19 00:38:22 IST 2025