Gujarat High Court
Ravjibhai Manjibhai Dedaniya vs State Of Gujarat on 8 August, 2022
Bench: Biren Vaishnav
C/SCA/12517/2019 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12517 of 2019
==========================================================
RAVJIBHAI MANJIBHAI DEDANIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS REEENA KAMANI, ADVOCATE FOR MR PH PATHAK(665) for the
Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3
MR KURVEN DESAI, ASST GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
Date : 08/08/2022
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Desai, learned AGP
waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent
State.
2. The prayers in the petition read as under:
"27 (A) The Hon'ble Court be pleased issue a
writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
writ, order or direction declaring the inaction of
the respondents in paying revised pay to the
petitioners as per the Vth and Vith pay
commission recommendation as well as in
granting the benefits of resolution dated
17.10.1988 to the petitioners is illegal, unjust,
arbitrary and hence in violation of Art. 14 and
C/SCA/12517/2019 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2022
16 of the Constitution of India and be pleased
to direct the respondents to pay arrears of
revised pay (as per 5th and 6th pay commission
recommendation) to the petitioners and also
extend all the benefits extended to the similarly
situated employees (as per the order anenxed
as ANNEXURE-H) to the petitioners with 12%
interest.
(B) The Hon'ble court be pleased to direct the
respondents to extend all the benefits of
government resolution dated 17/10/88 to the
petitioners employees from retrospective date
and pay arrears of amount with 12% interest.
(C) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the
respondents to pay the difference of pay
payable to class-4 employees to the petitioners
as per revised scale of pay in light of the
interim order issued by this Hon'ble Court at
ANNEXURE-B.
(D) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the
respondents to pay special cost and
compensation to petitioner employees for the
litigation as the respondents have not observed
the litigation policy of State of Gujarat.
(E) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to declare the
vague communication addressed by Deputy
Conservator of forest dated 28/12/18 as non
application of mind, arbitrary, illegal and unjst
and set aside the same and direct the
respondent to grant all the benefits of
resolution dated 17/10/88 to the petitioner
employees."
3. The petitioners had an occasion to approach this
C/SCA/12517/2019 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2022
court earlier by filing Special Civil Application No. 15909
of 2013 wherein this court passed the following order:
"1. Rule. Mr.Himanshu K. Patel, learned
Assistant Government Pleader, waives service
of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondents.
On the facts and in the circumstances of the
case and with the consent of learned counsel
for the respective parties, the petition is being
heard and decided finally.
2. By preferring this petition under Article-226
of the Constitution of India, petitioner No.1
has, inter alia, prayed that the benefits flowing
from the Government Resolution dated
17.10.1988 be granted to him.
3. Petitioner No.2 is a registered Trade Union.
Petitioner No.1 is a member of petitioner No.2-
Union. Petitioner No.1 is a daily-wage worker
working in the Forest Department of the State
of Gujarat for over ten years. The details of the
services rendered by petitioner No.1 are given
in the document at Annexure-A, at running
page-10, to the petition. He has put in more
than ten years of service in the Forest
Department as daily-wager and has rendered
continuous and uninterrupted service.
4. Petitioner No.1 asserts that similarly situated
daily-wagers have been granted the benefits of
the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988.
C/SCA/12517/2019 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2022
In State of Gujarat and others v. PWD
Employees Union, reported in 2013(8)
SCALE 579, the Supreme Court has directed
that the benefits of Government Resolution
dated 17.10.1988 be conferred upon the daily-
wagers working in the Forest and Environment
Department, who have been working as such
for more than five years. It is the case of
petitioner No.1 that he is squarely covered by
the above-mentioned judgment of the Supreme
Court, therefore, the prayers made in the
petition be granted.
5. Ms.Reena Kamani, learned advocate for
Mr.P.H.Pathak, learned advocate for the
petitioners, has submitted that even though the
Supreme Court has now ruled in favour of
similarly situated persons, the State
Government has not extended the benefits of
the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988,
to petitioner No.1, so far. The review petition
filed by the State Government in the Supreme
Court against the above-mentioned judgment
has now been dismissed by an order dated
29.01.2014 passed in Review Petition (C)
Nos.2826 and 2827 of 2013 in Civil Appeal
Nos.5321-5322 of 2013.
6. Mr.Himanshu K. Patel, learned Assistant
Government Pleader submits that in view of the
judgment of the Supreme Court, the
respondents may be directed to examine the
case of petitioner No.1, so as to ascertain his
entitlement to the benefits flowing from the
Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988.
C/SCA/12517/2019 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2022
7. This Court has heard learned counsel for the
respective parties and considered the material
on record. The petition is squarely covered by
the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of
Gujarat and others Vs. PWD Employees
Union (supra). The relevant paragraphs of the
judgment are quoted hereinbelow:
25. As per scheme contained in Resolution
dated 17th October, 1988 all the daily wage
workers were not entitled for regularization or
permanency in the services. As per the said
Resolution the daily wagers are entitled to the
following benefits:
(i) They are entitled to daily wages as per the
prevailing Daily Wages. If there is presence of
more than 240 days in first year, daily wagers
are eligible for paid Sunday, medical allowance
and national festival holidays.
(ii) Daily wagers and semi skilled workers
who has service of more than five years and
less than 10 years are entitled for fixed monthly
salary along with dearness allowance as per
prevailing standard, for his working days. Such
daily wagers will get two optional leave in
addition to 14 misc. leave, Sunday leave and
national festival holidays. Such daily wagers
will also be eligible for getting medical
allowance and deduction of provident fund.
(iii) Daily wagers and semi skilled workers who
has service of more than ten years but less than
15 years are entitled to get minimum pay scale
C/SCA/12517/2019 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2022
at par with skilled worker along with dearness
allowance as per prevailing standard, for his
working days. Moreover, such daily wagers will
get two optional leave in addition to 14 misc.
leave, Sunday leave and national festival
holidays. He/she will be eligible for getting
medical allowance and deduction of provident
fund.
(iv) Daily wagers and semi skilled workers who
has service of more than 15 years will be
considered as permanent worker and such semi
skilled workers will get current pay scale of
skilled worker along with dearness allowance,
local city allowance and house rent allowance.
They will get benefit as per the prevailing rules
of gratuity, retired salary, general provident
fund. Moreover, they will get two optional leave
in addition to 14 misc. leave, 30 days earned
leave, 20 days half pay leave, Sunday leave and
national festival holidays. The daily wage
workers and semi skilled who have completed
more than 15 years of their service will get one
increment, two increments for 20 years service
and three increments for 25 years in the
current pay scale of skilled workers and their
salary will be fixed accordingly.
26. Considering, the facts and circumstances of
the case, the finding of Gujarat High Court
dated 29th October, 2010 in SCA No.8647/2008
and connected matters and the fact that the
said judgment is binding between the parties,
we are of the view that the appellants should
be directed to grant the benefit of the scheme
as contained in the Resolution dated
C/SCA/12517/2019 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2022
17th October, 1988 to all the daily wage
workers of the Forest and Environment
Department working for more than five years,
providing them the benefits as per our finding
at Paragraph 25 above. The appellants are
directed accordingly. The judgment and order
passed by the learned Single Judge dated 29th
October, 2010 as affirmed by the Division
Bench by its order dated 28th February, 2012
stands modified to the extent above. The
benefit should be granted to the eligible daily
wage workers of the Forest and Environment
Department working for more than five years
including those who are performing work other
than building maintenance and repairing but
they will be entitled for the consequential
benefit w.e.f. 29th October, 2010 or subsequent
date from which they are so eligible within four
months from the date of receipt/production of
the copy of this order. The appeals stand
disposed of with the aforesaid observation and
directions to the appellant-State and its
authorities. There shall be no separate orders
as to costs.
8. The Review Petitions filed by the State
Government against this judgment have now
been dismissed by the Supreme
Court vide order dated 29.01.2014, passed in
Review Petition (C) Nos.2826 and 2827 of 2013
in Civil Appeal Nos.5321-5322 of 2013. In the
view of this Court, there remains no
impediment at all, on the part of the State
Government in extending the benefits of the
Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 to
C/SCA/12517/2019 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2022
petitioner No.1, subject to his fulfilling the
requisite conditions.
9. In view of the above, the following order is
passed:
The respondents shall examine the case of
petitioner No.1 and, if found eligible, shall
extend the benefits of the Government
Resolution dated 17.10.1988 to him, as per the
directions of the Supreme Court. The needful
be done within a period of four months from the
date of the receipt of a copy of this order.
10. The petition is allowed, to the above extent.
Rule is made absolute, accordingly."
4. Perusal of the order indicates that relying on the
decision of the Apex Court in the case of State Of
Gujarat vs. PWD Employees Union [(2013) 8 SCALE
579] and reproducing para 25 thereof, the court directed
the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner, if
found eligible and extend the benefits of the resolution
dated 17.10.1988 to him as per the directions of the Apex
Court. It appears that since the order of the Apex Court
in the case of PWD Employees Union (supra)
mentioned the date of 29.10.2010 as the date of
C/SCA/12517/2019 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2022
consequential benefits, by the impugned order dated
27.11.2014, the case of the petitioner though appointed
on 01.07.1986 has been considered for extending the
benefits of the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988
from 29.10.2010.
5. This apparently is a mistake on the part of the
respondents in extending the benefits of the resolution of
17.10.1988 particularly in case of an employee who is
engaged prior to the date of resolution dated 17.10.1988.
6. The petition is allowed. The respondents are
directed to consider and extend the benefits of the
resolution dated 17.10.1988 taking into consideration the
following years as the relevant years of appointment from
1984 and extend the benefits of the Government
Resolution dated 17.10.1988 accordingly.
Sr. Name Year of
No. Appointment
1 Ravjimanjibhai Dedaniya 1984
2 Ramabhaben Ravjibhai 1984
C/SCA/12517/2019 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2022
3 Ramjibhai Manjibhai 1984
4 Madhuramabhai 1985
5 Vithalbhai Manjibhai 1986
6 Vidhuben Vithalbhai 1986
7 Vaghaji Rana 1988
8 Jayaben Vaghajibhai 1988
9 Dinesh Bhima 1992
10 Kantaben Dineshbhai 1992
11 Hansraj Ranabhai Dedaniya 1998
12 Manjuben Hansraj 1998
6.1 The pensionary benefits in case of those employees
who have retired shall also be revised taking into account
their initial date of appointment as noted above as the
date for the benefit of pension. The entire exercise shall
be completed within a period of twelve weeks from the
date of receipt of the writ of the order of this court. Rule
is made absolute accordingly.
(BIREN VAISHNAV, J)
DIVYA
