Lataben Kantibhai Vaghela vs Deputy Conservator Of Forest, ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 16039 Guj

    C/SCA/15114/2020                                 ORDER DATED: 11/10/2021




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

            R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15114 of 2020

==========================================================
                LATABEN KANTIBHAI VAGHELA
                          Versus
   DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, BANASKANTHA-PALANPUR
==========================================================
Appearance:
HARSH V GAJJAR(7828) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
ADVANCE COPY SERVED TO GOVERNMENT PLEADER/PP(99) for the
Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL

                              Date : 11/10/2021
                               ORAL ORDER

Heard learned Advocate Mr. Harsh V. Gajjar for the petitioner.

At the outset, learned Advocate Mr. Gajjar tenders a draft amendment. The same is granted. To be carried out by 13.10.2021.

Learned Advocate Mr. Gajjar would submit that issue in this petition is with regard to payment of salary in the minimum of pay scale and whereas according to the learned Advocate, the issue is covered by the decision of this Court in Special Civil Application No. 7462 of 2012 confirmed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1155 of 2019. Learned Advocate would submit that by way of the draft amendment and order dated 04.01.2021 passed by the respondent No.1 is sought to be assailed, more particularly since the respondent has rejected the request of the petitioner, more particularly on the ground that the petitioner was not a party in the petitions referred to hereinabove. Learned Advocate would submit that neither the judgment of this Court in the writ petition as well as the Letters Patent Appeal does not restrict the benefit of the said judgment

C/SCA/15114/2020 ORDER DATED: 11/10/2021

to the petitioners in the said petition or the petitioners in the group of petitions listed along with the main petition. Learned Advocate would submit that an issue of law had been decided by this Court which would inure in favour of all similarly situated persons, therefore it was erroneous on the part of the respondents to have rejected the application of the petitioner for payment of minimum of pay scale.

Having regard to the submissions made by learned Advocate Mr. Gajjar, issue Notice for final disposal returnable on 27.10.2021.

Direct service is permitted.

(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J) BDSONGARA