Gujarat High Court
Navinbhai Ikalbhai Mahla vs State Of Gujarat on 1 February, 2022
Bench: Biren Vaishnav
C/SCA/6472/2021 ORDER DATED: 01/02/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6472 of 2021
==========================================================
NAVINBHAI IKALBHAI MAHLA & 64 other(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 5 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR M T SAIYAD(3848) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,2,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,3,30,31,32,
33,34,35,36,37,38,39,4,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,5,50,51,52,53,54,55,5
6,57,58,59,6,60,61,62,63,64,65,7,8,9
MR. MEET THAKKAR, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4,5,6
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
Date : 01/02/2022
ORAL ORDER
1 Heard Mr.M.T.Saiyad, learned advocate for the petitioners,
Mr,Meet Thakkar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State-
respondent and Mr.H.S.Munshaw, learned advocate for respondent No.2.
2 The prayer in this petition is to issue an appropriate writ or a
direction to the respondents to give the higher pay-scale to the petitioners
from the date of their entitlement.
3 Mr.M.T.Saiyad, learned advocate for the petitioners, would submit
that the only ground on which the respondent No.2 is not considering the
C/SCA/6472/2021 ORDER DATED: 01/02/2022
case of the petitioners is that they have obtained the CCC Certificate from
Dr.Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar Open University, and therefore, a
prayer is also made to declare the Certificate as valid for the purposes of
grant of higher pay-scale.
4 Mr.M.T.Saiyad, learned counsel, would submit that the issue is
covered by a decision of the Division Bench of this Court rendered in
Letters Patent Appeal No. 560 of 2019 dated 08.03.2019, wherein, in an
appeal filed by the State, the Court held as under:
"7 Perusal of the paragraphs reproduced hereinabove would
suggest that, though by various resolutions subsequent to the
resolution of 30.09.2006 sub centres of the Dr.Babasaheb
Ambedkar Open University were deleted as recognized centres for
the examination, however, it was undisputed that at some stage
examinations held by the University i.e. Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar
Open University were recognized centres for the purposes of
conducting the CCC examinations. The submission of the learned
Assistant Government Pleader that since the examination
conducted by Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar Open University for 400
marks was not in consonance with the syllabi of the State
Government which conducted examination for awarding such
certificates of 100 marks is no ground on which such examination
can be held to be invalid or improper for the purposes of extension
of the benefits of certificates being granted. 8 We have considered
the syllabus that has been annexed to the petition i.e. of the State
Government in the annexures A and B to the appropriate
government resolutions and to the syllabi of the course undertaken
by the Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar Open University. Perusal
extensively of these subjects which the University imparts for the
purposes of granting such certificates cannot be said to be in any
manner different for the purposes of extending the benefit of
computer proficiency. Merely because the subjects have been
worded differently or the words of the syllabi have been named in
a different manner, it cannot be said that the subjects that were
C/SCA/6472/2021 ORDER DATED: 01/02/2022
undertaken for giving computer proficiency by the Dr.Babasaheb
Ambedkar Open University were different and not in co-existence
with the syllabi prescribed by the State Government.
9 Essentially what was important and what is the spirit behind
such computer proficiency is that an employee of the state
government is well equipped to manage the computers. Reading of
the syllabi of both, the government and that of the Dr.Babasaheb
Ambedkar Open University would certainly lead us to believe that
it cannot be held that the proficiency course undertaken and the
certificate issued pursuant to the training undertaken at the
Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar Open University cannot be accepted by
the government, merely on the ground that the Open University
awarded a syllabus of 400 marks whereas the prescribed course
was of 100 marks. This ground appears to be not germane for the
purposes for which the certificate was issued.
10 Accordingly, we have no reason to find fault with the judgment
of the learned Single Judge. The Letters Patent Appeals are
accordingly dismissed. Civil Applications (For Stay) also stand
disposed of with no order as to costs."
5 Accordingly, there is no reason not to consider the case of the
petitoners for being granted the benefit of higher pay-scale. In absence of
any disqualification, the competent respondent authority shall consider
the case of the petitioners for grant of higher pay-scale as the issue is
decided and covered by a decision of the Division Bench and the
Resolution dated 15.01.2020, within a period of ten weeks from the date
of receipt of copy of this order. Petition allowed, accordingly.
(BIREN VAISHNAV, J)
Bimal
