Gujarat High Court
The Executive Engineer vs Narendrakumar Rameshbhai Shah on 28 July, 2021
Bench: A.S. Supehia
C/SCA/10967/2020 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10967 of 2020
==========================================================
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
Versus
NARENDRAKUMAR RAMESHBHAI SHAH
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MANISH J PATEL(2131) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
ARCHITA M PRAJAPATI(8241) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED(4) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
Date : 28/07/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule. Learned APP, Ms. Archita Prajapati waives service
of notice of rule for the respondent No.1.
2. The present petition has been filed, inter-alia, for the
following prayer:
"6(A) Quashing and setting aside the Order dt. 11-02-2020
passed by the Ld. Civil Services Tribunal, Gandhinagar in Appeal
No.144 of 2017 and confirm the orders of petitioners dated
22-08-2012 and 31-03-2016 and restore it.
(B) -----
(C) -----"
3. Learned advocate Mr. Manish Patel appearing for the
petitioners has submitted that the impugned order is required
to be quashed and set aside as the same is passed without
considering the relevant facts and he has further submitted
C/SCA/10967/2020 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2021
that the respondent employee has cleared the Departmental
Examination on 29.09.2001 and accordingly, he may be
granted the higher pay scale from the date of the earlier order
which was passed in 2001, which was erroneous and hence,
when it was relied, the subsequent order dated 28.08.2012
was passed. Thus, it is submitted that the impugned order may
be set aside.
4. Learned advocate Ms. Archita Prajapati appearing for
respondent-employee has submitted that the judgment of the
Tribunal does not require interference as the higher pay scale,
which was granted to the respondent with effect from
01.07.1990 on completion of 10 years of service is sought to
be withdrawn in the year 2020 by passing the impugned order.
It is submitted that the said order was challenged in the
Tribunal and the Tribunal, after considering the relevant
aspects, has set aside the order. It is further submitted that in
fact, no opportunity was granted to the respondent No.1 for
appearing in the Departmental Examination and hence he is
entitled for the higher pay scale from the actual date of
eligibility and not from the date of passing the examination. It
is further submitted that the impugned order dated 28.08.2012
is precisely quashed and set aside by the Tribunal.
5. It is not in dispute that the respondent No.1 was granted
the higher pay scale after he completed 9 years of service
from the year 1990. He was granted higher pay scale from
01.07.1990 vide an order dated 26.02.2002. It is also not in
dispute that the departmental examination was cleared by the
respondent in his first chance on 29.09.2001. The petitioner
authority vide order dated 28.08.2012, after a period of almost
C/SCA/10967/2020 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2021
10 years has cancelled the higher pay scale. It is also not in
dispute that the impugned order withdrawing the higher pay
scale has been passed without affording an opportunity of
hearing to the respondent employee. The petitioner
department has sought to alter the pay scale of the workman
on the premise of passing the examination in the year 2001.
However, the fact remains that prior to that no opportunity of
holding the examination was afforded to the respondent
employee. Hence, for the fault of the respondents for not
holding the departmental exams, the Respondent cannot be
made to suffer.
6. In light of the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the
considered opinion that the order passed by the Tribunal does
not suffer from any illegality or perversity. Hence, the petition
is rejected. Rule is discharged. There shall be no order as to
cost.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
MAYA S. CHAUHAN
