Gujarat High Court
Kishorbhai Kalidas Parmar vs The State Of Gujarat on 15 March, 2021
Bench: Ashutosh J. Shastri
C/SCA/4773/2021 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4773 of 2021
==========================================================
KISHORBHAI KALIDAS PARMAR
Versus
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR JAYANT P BHATT(169) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR JEET J BHATT(6154) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR KRUTIK PARIKH, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI
Date : 15/03/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. This petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India is filed for the purpose of
seeking following reliefs:
"A. Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus
or in the nature of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction
holding the action of the respondent
authorities in not granting the benefit of
higher pay scale to the petitioners despite
of having working for 36 to 38 years on the
work charge establishment is arbitrary,
discriminatory and violative of Article 14
and 21 of the Constitution of India.
B. Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus
or in the nature of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction and
direct the respondent authorities to
convert the petitioners service from work
charge establishment into temporary
C/SCA/4773/2021 ORDER
establishment after having completed 20
years of service and thereafter, to grant
the higher pay scale after having worked
for 12 years thereafter as has been held by
this Hon'ble Court in judgement dated
29.06.2018 passed in Letters Patel Appeal
No.380 of 2016 and allied matters and also
grant all consequential benefits as well as
arrears of the said benefits.
D. Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus
or in the nature of mandamus or any other
appropriate wirt, order or direction and
direct the respondent no.1 to take decision
on the representation dt. 02.02.2021 made
by the petitioners and extend the benefit
of the judgment dated 29.06.2018 passed in
Letters Patent Appeal No.380 of 2016 to all
similarly situated employees working on the
work charge establishment with 18% interest
from the date of entitlement till the date
of grant of the benefits.
E. Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus
or in the nature of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction and
directing the respondent authorities to
decide the representation dated 02.02.2021
made by the petitioners to the respondent
authorities within a period of four weeks
and extend the benefits granted to the
similarly situated employees as per the
judgement dated 29.06.2018 passed in
Letters Patent Appeal No. 380 of 2016 and
allied matters.
F. Pending admission till final disposal
of the petition, be pleased to direct the
respondent authorities in taking a decision
on the representation dated 02.02.2021 made
by the petitioners to the respondent
authorities within a period of four weeks
and extend the benefits as have been
granted to all the similarly situated
employees in accordance with the judgment
dated 29.06.2018 passed in Letters Patent
C/SCA/4773/2021 ORDER
Appeal No. 380 of 2016 and allied matters.
G. Be pleased to pass such other and
further order as may be deemed fit by this
Hon'ble Court."
2. During the course of submission, the learned
advocate Mr.Jeet J. Bhatt for the petitioner has
candidly submitted that before approaching this Court
a specific written representation was submitted
before the respondent-authority on 02.02.2021
reflecting on page 14 of the petition compilation.
However, the respondent-authority so far, neither has
examined the representation nor has taken any
decision and as such, has requested this Court to
direct the authority to take appropriate decision on
pending representation instead of examining the merit
of contention of petitioner raised in this petition
and has also requested that the petitioner may be
permitted to point out specifically the relevant
decision taken on the issue in question.
3. To this submission, learned AGP Mr.Krutik Parikh
appearing on behalf of the authority on advance copy
has submitted that if the decision is not taken then
some appropriate direction be issued to decide the
same for which there is no reason but has requested
the Court not to express any opinion on merit.
4. Having considered the submission made before
this Court, the Court is inclined to issue
appropriate direction without expressing any opinion
on merit with regard to any of the contention since
C/SCA/4773/2021 ORDER
not called upon and practically by concurrence, the
present petition stands disposed of on following
lines, which would meet the ends of justice:
(i) The respondent competent authorities before whom
the representation dated 02.02.2021 is submitted by
the petitioner shall be examined and appropriate
decision in accordance with law shall be taken as
early as possible preferably within a period of 8
weeks from the date of receipt of writ of this Court.
(ii) It is made clear that this Court has not
expressed any opinion on merit with regard to any of
the contention raised and the petitioner has not
called upon and as such, it is independently left it
open for the authority to take appropriate decision
in accordance with law in aforesaid time schedule and
shall pass the reasoned order.
With this observations and directions, the present
petition stands disposed of. Direct service is
permitted.
(ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI, J)
KUMAR ALOK
