State Of Gujarat vs Shinde Ganesh Shantaram
2021 Latest Caselaw 17258 Guj

    C/SCA/12591/2021                                ORDER DATED: 16/11/2021




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

            R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12591 of 2021

==========================================================
                           STATE OF GUJARAT
                                 Versus
                       SHINDE GANESH SHANTARAM
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR UTKARSH SHARMA, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER(1) for the
Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL

                             Date : 16/11/2021

                              ORAL ORDER

Heard learned AGP Mr. Utkarsh Sharma on behalf of the petitioner state. By way of this petition, the petitioner state seeks to challenge an order dated 05.03.2012 passed in Application No. 43 of 2012 by the learned Gujarat Higher Secondary Schools Services Tribunal of Ahmedabad. The grievance raised by the petitioner being that the applicant before the learned Tribunal who had sought for grant of Second higher pay scale, which grievance had been redressed by the learned Tribunal by way of impugned Judgment, is based on erroneous appreciation of the facts as well as of Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994.

In considered opinion of this Court the order of the learned Tribunal being of the year 2012, the challenge by the State to the same is grossly delayed. That the State has also tried submit that since the original applicant before the learned Tribunal had approached the Tribunal for grant of second higher pay scale after long delay of 11 years therefore, the present petition may be entertained by this Court.

C/SCA/12591/2021 ORDER DATED: 16/11/2021

Such a submission cannot be countenanced since an employee seeking higher pay scale coming to a Tribunal or a Court after a substantial period of time, he is entitled to claim that the loss which occurs to the employees is recurring loss every month and therefore the dispute is in-continuation which submission may not be permissible for the State to take. This Court notes that by way of the impugned order, the learned Tribunal has directed the State to extend the benefit of second higher scale to the applicant therein. The decision of the learned Tribunal is challenged before this Court after a delay of 9 years. There is no explanation provided for the delay in the petition or the additional affidavit preferred by the State.

In the considered opinion of this Court the decision of the Tribunal conferring certain benefits to employee, ought not to be interfered with since challenge to the decision is after approximately 9 years and as noted above, there is no explanation towards the delay.

Furthermore, in considered opinion of this Court interest of the State can be taken care by clarifying that the decision of the learned Tribunal impugned in the present petition shall not be treated as a precedent in any later case where the similar issue is raised and whereas the same shall be decided independently by the learned Tribunal in accordance with law. With these limited observations the present petition stands rejected on the ground of gross and unexplained delay.

(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)

Mrs. J. J. Kedia