Gujarat High Court
Sachindra Jagdishchandra Pathak vs State Of Gujarat on 17 December, 2021
Bench: A.S. Supehia
C/SCA/12582/2019 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.12582 of 2019
================================================================
SACHINDRA JAGDISHCHANDRA PATHAK
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
MR DIPAK R DAVE(1232) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR ADITYASINH JADEJA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MS DHARMISHTA RAVAL(707) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
Date : 17/12/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. With consent of the learned advocates for the respective
parties, the main matter is taken up for final hearing.
2. RULE. Learned AGP Mr.Aditya Jadeja waives service of
rule for respondent no.1 and learned advocate Ms.Dharmishta
Raval waives service of rule for respondent nos.2 and 3.
3. In the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for
the following reliefs:-
"(A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of
mandamus and/or a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any
other appropriate writ, order or direction.
I. To direct the respondents to grant benefits of Government
Resolution dated 17.10.1988 to the petitioner and the petitioner be
treated as permanent employees after completion of 5 years of
service and be given all the benefits of permanent employees
including fix pay on the date the petitioner completed his 5 years of
service;
II. To direct respondents to extend all the benefits of regular post
with regular pay-scale in favour of the petitioner from the date he
has completed 10 years of service as per the G.R. dated
17.10.1988;
III. To direct respondents to pay difference of salary to the
petitioner after placing the petitioner in pay-scale after completion
of 10 years of service;
IV. Be pleased to direct respondents to treat the petitioner as
permanent employees after he has completed 10 years of service
and be pleased to direct respondents to pay all consequential
benefits to the petitioner treating him permanent after his
completion of 10 years of service."
C/SCA/12582/2019 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2021
4. The petitioner was appointed as a Work Charge clerk
from 01.09.1992 till 08.11.1993. The petitioner thereafter
worked as a daily wage clerk from 09.11.1193 till 09.02.1994.
The petitioner is thereafter working as adaily wage clerk from
10.03.1994 till date.
5. At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Dipak R. Dave for the
petitioner has submitted that the issue is squarely covered by
the catena of judgments of the Coordinate Benches as well as
the Division Benches of this Court. He has submitted that the
only reason for not extending benefits of the Government
Resolution dated 17.10.1988 as per the affidavit of the
respondent nos.2 and 3 is that the petitioner is appointed after
1988 and hence the resolution 17.10.1988 is not applicable to
the Gujarat Maritime Board (Board).
5.1 Learned advocate Mr.Dipak R. Dave has submitted that
there are various judgments passed against the present
respondent-Board, wherein the Court has extended the
benefits of 5th and 6th Pay Commissions and it is recorded by
this Court that the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988
would applicable to the employees of the respondent-Board,
who are appointed after the cut-off date i.e. 17.10.1988. He
has also drawn attention to Page Nos.50 and 56 of the petition
to contend that several persons junior to the petitioner are
given benefits arising from Government Resolution dated
17.10.1988.
5.2 In support of his submissions, the learned advocate for
the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment dated
25.09.2019 passed in Special Civil Application No.12046 of
2019, which is also confirmed by the Division Bench vide order
C/SCA/12582/2019 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2021
dated 08.09.2020 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.510 of
2020, the order dated 23.01.2018 passed in Special Civil
Application No.15055 of 2017, which was confirmed by the
Division Bench by the order dated 07.09.2018 passed in
Letters Patent Appeal No.1148 of 2018 and the order dated
23.01.2018 passed in Special Civil Application No.6083 of
2017, which was confirmed by the order dated 24.08.2018
passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.1101 of 2018 and lastly
and finally the order dated 26.10.2018 passed in Special Civil
Application No.3756 of 2018, which was confirmed by the
order dated 24.01.2019 passed in Letters Patent Appeal
No.231 of 2019.
5.3 Thus, learned advocate Mr.Dipak R. Dave has submitted
that it is well settled that Government Resolution dated
17.10.1988 has been adopted by the Gujarat Maritime Board
and the petitioner may be extended the benefits of
Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988.
6. In response to the aforesaid submissions, learned
advocate Ms.Dharmishta Raval for the respondent nos.2 and 3
has submitted that in fact on instruction of the State
Government, benefits of Government Resolution dated
17.10.1988 were not extended to the petitioner since it was
opined by the State Government that the judgment of this
Court rendered in Letters Patent Appeal No.325 of 2005 will be
applicable to the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board
only and not to the respondent-Board.
7. Learned advocate Ms.Raval has further referred to the
averments made in the affidavit-in-reply, more particularly,
C/SCA/12582/2019 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2021
Paragraph No.4 thereof, wherein she has stated that the
respondent has refused to grant the benefits of Government
Resolution dated 17.10.1988 since the petitioner is appointed
after 1988. Learned advocate for the respondent no.2 has also
submitted that in fact for the extension of benefits, approval of
the State Government is required. No further submissions are
advanced by the learned advocate for the respondents.
8. Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties
and perused the judgments and orders as mentioned here-in-
above.
9. In the present writ petition, the petitioner is claiming to
extend the benefits of Government Resolution dated
17.10.1988 and to fix his pay after completion of 5, 10 and 15
years of service. It is not in dispute that all the aforenoted
judgments are passed against the respondent-Board. The
perusal of the judgments would reveal that the benefits of
Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 are extended to all
the daily wagers and the same is also adopted by the Gujarat
Maritime Board and in case of those daily wagers also, who are
appointed after the cut-off date i.e. 17.10.1988. Though, the
judgments pertain to grant of benefits of 5 th and 6th Pay
Commissions, they also refer to the fact that the daily wagers,
working under the Gujarat Maritime Board, are extended the
benefits of Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988. Further
in wake of the fact that the respondents have extended
benefits of Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 to the
junior employees then the petitioner, which is clearly
established from the correspondence of the respondents at
Page 50 and 56 of the petition.
C/SCA/12582/2019 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2021
10. The facts recorded in the order dated 26.10.2018 passed
in Special Civil Application No.3756 of 2018, which has been
confirmed by the Division Bench, is as under:-
"2. Seven petitioners who joined the services under respondent
Gujarat workers and Maritime subsequently Board came to as be
daily rated extended the benefit under Government Resolution
dated 17.10.1988, have prayed, by filing the present petition, to
extend the benefit of 6th Pay Commission and 7th Pay
Commission and to pay their paying the revised pay scale with
effect from 01.01.2006 and 01.01.2016 respectively. The
petitioners have further prayed to direct the respondent
authorities to pay the arrears.
3. Noticing the relevant facts, having been appointed initially as
daily wagers, the petitioners were granted the benefits under
resolution dated 17.10.1988 upon their completion of requisite
number of years in service. When 5th Pay Commission
recommendations were implemented, they were granted the said
benefit also. The 6th Pay Commission was implemented from by
the 01.01.2006. Central The Government recommendations with
effect came to be adopted by the State Government and all
governmental authorities in the year 2009. The 7th Pay
Commission recommendations which was brought into force from
01.01.2016 was also adopted by the State Government and its
authorities."
11. While passing the order dated 25.09.2019 in Special Civil
Application No.12046 of 2019, the Court has recorded thus:-
"3. The petitioner joined service as daily wager in the year 1999
under the respondent Gujarat Maritime Board at the office of Port
Officer, Veraval. When the petitioner completed 5 years and 10
years of his service, he was extended the benefits under the
resolution dated 17.10.1988. At the time when 5th Pay
Commission scales were implemented, the said benefit was also
given to the petitioner. learned advocate Central Government
recommendations 1.1.2006. for of petitioner introduced which
6th were that Pay the the Commission implemented from The
State Government adopted the scales of 6th Pay Commission.
Also the It is stated by adopted the Likewise, the State
Government recommendations of 7th Pay Commission."
12. While passing the order dated 23.01.2018 in Special Civil
Application No.15055 of 2017, this Court has recorded thus:-
"3. The husband of the petitioner was appointed on 5th January,
1989 as daily- wager by the respondent No.4. He was given the
benefits of Government Resolution dated 17th October, 1988 on
05th January, 1989 after completion of five years and further
C/SCA/12582/2019 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2021
benefits have been extended on 13th April, 1994 after
completion of ten years. He was also given benefits of the Fifth
Pay Commission by virtue of Government Resolution dated 30 th
March, 1998."
13. Thus, it is not open for the respondent-Board to contend
that the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 is not
applicable to the daily wagers appointed by the respondent-
Board. Such stand is illegal, ill-conceived and contrary to the
facts recorded by this Court in the aforenoted judgments. The
respondent authorities, including the State Government cannot
recant from the facts, as narrated and recorded by this Court
that all the daily wagers, who had approached this Court
claiming benefits of the Pay Commission have been extended
benefits of Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 and
accordingly, their pay-scale were also fixed.
14. Under the circumstances, the respondents are directed to
extend the benefits of Government Resolution dated
17.10.1988 to the petitioner and his pay shall be accordingly
fixed after completion of 5, 10 and 15 years of service.
Necessary order to that effect shall be passed within a period
of three months from the date of receipt of the writ of the
order of this Court.
15. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is
disposed of. Rule is made absolute.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
MAHESH BHATI/61
