Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Shakinaben Mamadbhai Hala on 12 October, 2021
Bench: N.V.Anjaria, A. P. Thaker
C/LPA/888/2021 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 888 of 2021
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6357 of 2017
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2021
In
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 888 of 2021
================================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
SHAKINABEN MAMADBHAI HALA
================================================================
Appearance:
MR MANAN MEHTA, AGP (1) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
and
HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER
Date : 12/10/2021
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)
Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Manan
Mehta for the appellant-State.
2. The challenge in this Letters Patent Appeal filed under
Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is addressed to judgment and
order dated 4.2.2020 of learned Single Judge in Special Civil
Application No.6357 of 2017. Learned Single Judge, relying on
the decision of the Apex Court in PWD Employees Union v.
State of Gujarat, (2013) 12 SCC 417, extended, in the facts
of the case, benefits of family pension to the petitioner on the
basis of the pensionable service rendered by the husband of
the petitioner.
C/LPA/888/2021 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2021
3. The prayer in the Special Civil Application was to direct
the respondent authorities to pay the arrears of salary, family
pension and other retiral benefits, which were payable to the
husband of the petitioner. The husband of the petitioner joined
services in the year 1985 under respondent no.2, Chief
Conservator of Forest at Bhachau Range and worked till he
died on 27.2.2012 while in service. The case is that the
husband of the petitioner thus put in more than 27 years of
service, however, was not given the benefit of Government
Resolution dated 17.10.1988, which would include the
pensionary benefits as the requisite length of service was
competed by him.
4. Learned Single Judge while allowing the petition of the
petitioner inter alia rested his decision on the judgment
delivered in Special Civil Application No.13545 of 2015 dated
15.9.2015, in which the same issue was dealt with. The
husband of the petitioner of the said case was an employee,
who had worked from 1987 to 2004, and had prayed for grant
of pension on the basis of the aforementioned resolution of the
State Government dated 17.10.1988.
5. The factum of husband of the petitioner's service of 20
years and more was an undisputed aspect before learned
Single Judge. On said basis and on the basis of the decision
relied on, as above, as well as by further relying on the
decision of the Apex Court in PWD Employees Union (supra),
learned Single Judge allowed the petition by directing the
respondent to calculate and pay the family pension to the
petitioner on the basis of husband of the petitioner having
rendered pensionable service.
C/LPA/888/2021 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2021
6. We further notice that in State of Gujarat v. Hiraben
Keshaji Thakor widow of Keshaji Jagaji Thakor in Letters
Patent Appeal No.548 of 2016 decided by Division Bench on
28.6.2016 also same issue was considered and wherein also on
the basis of 22 years of service of the workman-employee, the
grant of retiral benefits was approved by the Division Bench.
7. In view of all above facts, no error could be noticed in the
impugned judgment and order of learned Single Judge. No
interference is called for. Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed as
meritless.
ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION
Civil Application does not survive in view of disposal of
the main appeal.
(N.V.ANJARIA, J)
(DR. A. P. THAKER, J)
R.S. MALEK
