State Of Gujart vs Kulsamben Jina Shah
2021 Latest Caselaw 473 Guj

          C/LPA/83/2021                                    ORDER



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

            R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 83 of 2021
                               In
          R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3966 of 2016
===========================================================
                       STATE OF GUJART
                             Versus
                    KULSAMBEN JINA SHAH
===============================================================
Appearance:
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, AGP (1) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
MR SHALIN MEHTA, SR ADVOCATE with ADITI S RAOL(8128) for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
===============================================================
 CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM
          NATH
          and
          HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI
                       Date : 13/01/2021
                        ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH)

We have heard Ms. Shruti Pathak, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the appellants - State and Mr. Shalin Mehta, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. Aditi Raol, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. Learned Single Judge, relying upon the material placed before the Court, has recorded in paragraph 7 of the judgment that the petitioner was appointed on 18.09.1989 as a daily wager and worked as such till 17.09.2000 i. e. for more than 10 years. However, thereafter, her status was changed and converted to the piece rated worker. Learned Single Judge further considered the said material on record and legal position with regard to the definition of wages and came to the conclusion that the petitioner was entitled to the benefits of Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 and accordingly, quashed the order dated 02.11.2015 by which the benefits were denied.

C/LPA/83/2021 ORDER

3. Ms. Shruti Pathak, learned Assistant Government Pleader has not been able to show that the facts recorded by the learned Single Judge are incorrect or contrary to record. On the other hand, Mr. Mehta, learned senior counsel has referred to the relevant documents of the department according to which the facts recorded by the learned Single Judge are based.

4. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the judgment of the learned Single Judge. The appeal lacks merits and accordingly, the same is dismissed.

(VIKRAM NATH, CJ)

(ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI, J) cmk