Gujarat High Court
Pwd And Forest Employees Union vs State Of Gujarat on 29 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17531 of 2015
==========================================================
PWD AND FOREST EMPLOYEES UNION & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. SHALIN MEHTA WITH MS. ADITI S RAOL(8128) for the Petitioner(s)
No. 1
MS VIDHI J BHATT (6155) for the Petitioner(s) No. 2
DR. POOJA ASHAR, AGP for the Respondents - STATE
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s) No. 2
RULE NOT RECD BACK for the Respondent(s) No. 1,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 29/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present petition is filed by the petitioners for seeking the following reliefs:
"A. Your Lordships be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the impugned letter dated 20.2.2015 from the respondent no. 4 denying the petitioner no. 2 the benefits as contained in Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated 9.7.2013 as arbitrary, unreasonable, irrational, bad in law and thus violative of Articles 14, 16, 21 and 23 of the Constitution of India and quashing and setting aside the same;
B. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to extend Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Tue Sep 30 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 30 23:13:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined to the petitioner no. 2 the benefits as contained in Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 9.7.2013 (reported in 2013 (8) Scale 579) to the petitioner no. 2 from the date he became eligible for such benefits with all the consequential benefits, including arrears of pay and allowances;
C. Your Lordships be pleased to permanently restrain the respondents herein from terminating or discontinuing the services of the petitioner no. 2 other wise than in accordance with law;
D. Pending admission and final hearing of the present petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to process the case of the petitioner no. 2 for grant of the benefits as contained in Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988;
E. Pending admission and final hearing of the present petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to restrain the respondent authorities from taking any coercive action against or terminating the services of the petitioner no. 2 otherwise than in accordance with law; and F. Your Lordships may be pleased to pass any other and/or further order, as deemed it, in the interest of justice."
2. Brief facts as stated in the memo of the petition are as under:
Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Tue Sep 30 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 30 23:13:23 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined 2.1 It is the case of the petitioners in this petition that the petitioner no. 2 is a daily-wager working in the Forests and Environment Department of the State since last several years. He has, by now, put in more than 5 years of service as a daily-wager. It is further the case of the petitioners in this petition that despite serving since last several years, the petitioner no. 2 is getting only the minimum wages as per the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. Earlier, he was being paid bonus on a notional wage. At present, even the bonus is not paid to him. Barring the minimum wages, no other benefits or perquisites in the nature of allowances, etc. are extended to the petitioner no. 2. In other words, the petitioner no. 2 herein is not even given a regular pay scale even after so many years of service. On reaching the age of superannuation, the petitioner no. 2 would not be entitled to pension, provident fund and gratuity. Any kind of leave, be it casual leave, earned leave or medical leave, is not admissible to the petitioner no. 2 and he is not even given the benefit of public holidays. It is further the case of the petitioners in this petition that for the daily-wagers of the Narmada Water Resources, Water Supply and Kalpasar Department and of the Roads and Buildings Department, who are otherwise equal to the daily-wagers in the Forests and Environment Department in all respects, there is a scheme in place for Page 3 of 8 Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Tue Sep 30 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 30 23:13:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined according quasi permanent status to them. The scheme was launched by Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 issued by the Roads & Buildings Department. It is important to note that though the Forests and Environment Department finds mention in the preamble of the said Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988, it is not made applicable to the daily-wagers of the Forests and Environment Department.
Thus, the said Government Resolution is selectively applied to the daily-wagers of the Narmada Water Resources, Water Supply and Kalpasar Department and of the Roads and Buildings Department, though the preamble of the said Government Resolution clearly seeks to confer benefits upon the daily-wagers of the other departments mentioned therein which include the Forests and Environment Department where the petitioner no. 2 is engaged. It is further the case of the petitioners in this petition that after hearing the parties in Civil Appeals no. 5321-5322 of 2013 arising out of Special Leave Petitions (C) no. 13619-13620 of 2012, the Hon'ble Apex Court, vide its judgment dated 09.07.2013 directed the State (appellant therein) to grant the benefits of the scheme as contained in Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 to all the daily-wage workers of the Forests and Environment Department working for more than five years. It is further the case of the petitioners in this petition that pursuant to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court, Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Tue Sep 30 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 30 23:13:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined Government of Gujarat in Forests and Environment Department issued Government Resolution dated 15.9.2014 extending the benefits of Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 to the daily-wagers working in the Forests and Environment Department.
3.2 It is further the case of the petitioners in this petition that on 15.1.2015, the petitioner no. 1 on behalf of the petitioner no. 2 wrote to the respondent no. 4 requesting him to extend the benefits of Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 to the petitioner no. 2. On 20.2.2015, the respondent no. 4 rejected the request of the petitioner no. 2 on the ground that from November, 2009 to October, 2012, the petitioner no. 2 was working as a daily-wager but from 1.11.2012 to 31.1.2015, he has been working as a piece rate employee and therefore, the Government Resolution dated 15.9.2014 is not applicable to him. It is further the case of the petitioners in this petition that the petitioner no. 2 is thus denied the benefits as contained in Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 on the specious plea that he is not qualified for such benefits in terms of Government Resolution dated 15.9.2014 as he is piece rate worker. It is further the case of the petitioners in this petition that the petitioner no. 2, since inception, has been working as a daily- wager wireman and his service conditions have never been Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Tue Sep 30 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 30 23:13:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined changed. Assuming for the sake of argument that his service conditions came to be changed from 1.11.2012, then, the same are changed unilaterally by the respondent no. 4 without informing the petitioner no. 2. Hence, the present petition has been preferred.
3. Heard Mr. Shalin Mehta, learned senior advocates with Ms. Aditi Raol, learned advocate with Ms. Vidhi Bhatt, learned advocate for the respective petitioners and Dr. Pooja Ashar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
4. Mr. Shalin Mehta, learned senior advocates with Ms. Aditi Raol, learned advocate with Ms. Vidhi Bhatt, learned advocate for the respective petitioners has contended that benefit of Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 is required to be given to the present petitioners as the petitioners have worked continuously for more than five years. For that, the attention of this Court is drawn towards the communication dated 20.02.2015 made by the Principal, Gujarat Forest Rangers College, Rajpipla to the President of PWD, Employees Association and also the details given with the affidavit-in-rejoinder where attendance of the petitioner for the period from 01.09.2009 to 01.02.2015 was mentioned by giving the days of service. He has submitted that in view of Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Tue Sep 30 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 30 23:13:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined this, appropriate direction may be given to the respondent- authority to give the benefit of G.R. dated 01.10.1988 or subsequent G.R. of the Government, in appropriate manner and consider the case of the petitioners accordingly.
5. Per contra, Dr. Pooja Ashar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent - State has objected the aforesaid submissions, more particularly, the details produced in affidavit-in-rejoinder in tabular form by showing the concern that there is no mentioning that which authority has issued this documents and who has signed this document and authenticity of such document is also required to be verified. Considering the averments made in affidavit-in-reply as well as considering the contention raised by the respondent-State, she has submitted that without verification, no benefit can be granted, more particularly, the entire record, which is required to be verified by the authority and then only, the prayers as prayed in the present petition, can be granted.
6.1 Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, and considering the submissions made by the respective parties at the bar, I am of the opinion that interest of justice would be survived if the respondent- authority will look into the entire service record of the Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Tue Sep 30 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 30 23:13:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined present petitioners available with the respondent-authority and after verifying the necessary details, if it is found that the petitioners are entitled to get the benefit of Government Resolution dated 01.10.1988, then the case of the petitioner shall be considered accordingly and thereafter, by giving necessary benefits accordingly. If it is not found then the authority may take appropriate decision in accordance with law. Such exercise shall be carried out by the respondent- authority within eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
6.2 This Court deems it fit that abovementioned direction will serve the purpose of the petitioners appropriately. Therefore, the present petition is disposed of accordingly. It is expected that the Authority shall take the decision in accordance with law after verifying the record of service of the petitioners available with the Authority and take decision in accordance with law.
6.3 Since the abovementioned order is passed considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court has also not expressed any opinion on the merits regarding the contention raised by respective parties.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J) DIWAKAR SHUKLA Page 8 of 8 Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Tue Sep 30 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 30 23:13:23 IST 2025