Gujarat High Court
Avinash Jasvantlal Shah vs Anju Sharma, Ias, Principal ... on 16 November, 2021
Bench: A.J.Desai, Samir J. Dave
C/MCA/442/2021 ORDER DATED: 16/11/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 442 of 2021
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4263 of 2012
================================================================
AVINASH JASVANTLAL SHAH
Versus
ANJU SHARMA, IAS, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HIGHER AND TECHNICAL
EDUCATION)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR VAIBHAV A VYAS(2896) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
MS VRUNDA SHAH, AGP for the Opponent(s) No. 2
NOTICE SERVED(4) for the Opponent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.J.DESAI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMIR J. DAVE
Date : 16/11/2021
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.J.DESAI)
1. By way of present application under section 12 of the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 the applicants- original
petitioners have approached this Court to take action against
the respondents for non-compliance of judgment and order
dated 05.05.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special
Civil Application No.4263 of 2012 and other allied matters.
2. In response to the notice issued by this Court, the respondent
authorities have filed their affidavit and produced relevant
documents on record.
C/MCA/442/2021 ORDER DATED: 16/11/2021
3. Mr. Vaibhav Vyas, learned advocate for the applicants would
submit that learned Single Judge has directed the Respondent
Authorities to grant all the benefits to the petitioners at par
with those lecturers who had been appointed on the selfsame
post in the year 2004. He would also submit that the said
decision was challenged by the State authorities by way of
Letters Patent Appeal No.1953 of 2017, which was ultimately
withdrawn on 16.11.20217 under the instructions dated
09.11.2017 from the Legal Department. He would submit that
the applicants were appointed on the post of lecturers
between 1992-1995 and were ultimately ordered to be
absorbed as per the order passed by learned Single Judge. He
would also submit that during the pendency of Letters Patent
Appeal, the applicants have filed undertakings in the nature
of settlement arrived at between the petitioners and the State
Authorities, which were produced on record by the
Respondent authorities alongwith their affidavit, however,
they have not forgone their benefits, which are available
under the Career Advancement Scheme floated by the State
Authorities. He therefore would submit that appropriate
contempt proceedings may be initiated and the respondents
may be directed to purge the contempt.
4. On the other hand, Ms.Vrunda Shah, learned AGP would
submit that the respondent authorities have given all the
benefits as per the direction issued by this Court, particularly
in consonance with the settlement arrived at between the
petitioners and Respondent authorities. She has taken us
C/MCA/442/2021 ORDER DATED: 16/11/2021
through one of such undertakings filed by the petitioners,
which are produced on the record and would submit that the
petitioners, who are lecturers were aware about the rights and
have filed their undertakings stating that they are ready to
have benefits under Pensionary Scheme of 2004 and have also
declared that they shall not claim any other benefits including
any arrears, pay etc. She would submit that in view of the
aforesaid settlement arrived at between the parties, the Letters
Patent Appeal, which was filed by the State authorities
challenging the order passed by learned Single Judge was
withdrawn. She would submit that now the applicants-
original petitioners have come forward alleging that the
respondents have committed contempt of Court by not
complying the order of learned Single Judge urging the Court
to look into the agreement and/or undertaking. She would
submit that if there is any grievance with regard to the
benefits under the Career Advancement Scheme, they may
raise such grievance before the appropriate Forum and such
grievance of the applicants cannot be entertained under the
proceedings of contempt of Court. She therefore would
submit that present application may be dismissed
accordingly.
5. We have heard learned advocates appearing for the respective
parties.
6. It is true that learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment
directed the respondent authorities to grant all the benefits to
C/MCA/442/2021 ORDER DATED: 16/11/2021
the petitioners at par with those lecturers who had been
appointed on the same post in the year 2004. The said decision
had been challenged by the Respondent authorities by way of
Letters Patent Appeal No.1953 of 2017 and no doubt all the
applicants had filed their undertakings before the State
Authorities, wherein they have declared that they are ready to
have benefits under the old pension scheme of 2004 and they
shall not claim any other benefits including arrears, pay etc. in
future. Such undertakings were filed on 14.11.20217. In view
of such settlement arrived at between the petitioners and the
State Authorities, the State authorities have withdrawn the
Letters Patent Appeal. We have also gone through order
dated 04.11.2020 passed by learned Single Judge in Misc. Civil
Application No.1 of 2020 in Special Civil Application No.4263
of 2012. It appears that at the time of passing of such order,
these undertakings have not been produced before the
learned Single Judge by either of the party. There is no doubt
that except the demand with regard to Career Advancement
Scheme, the order has been complied with and therefore, we
do not find any reason to proceed further with the present
proceeding under the Contempts of Court Act. We have
accepted the submissions of Ms.Shah, learned AGP that the
Court while exercising the powers under the provisions of
Contempt of Courts Act cannot interpret the undertaking filed
by the applicants. It would be open for the applicants to raise
such contentions before the appropriate Forum.
C/MCA/442/2021 ORDER DATED: 16/11/2021
7. In view of the above, present Misc. Civil Application deserves
to be dismissed and accordingly stands dismissed. Notice is
discharged.
(A.J.DESAI, J)
(SAMIR J. DAVE,J)
MEHUL
