Gujarat High Court
Anand District Panchayat vs Mahendrasinh A. Rana on 8 August, 2023
Bench: N.V.Anjaria
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/658/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 658 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 18796 of 2017
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 2 of 2022
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 658 of 2023
==========================================================
ANAND DISTRICT PANCHAYAT
Versus
MAHENDRASINH A. RANA
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR IQBAL M MALIK(434) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA
AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
Date : 08/08/2023
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)
Heard learned advocate Mr. H.S. Munshaw for the
appellant District Panchayat and learned advocat Mr.
Iqbal Malik who appeared for the respondent.
2. Learned Single Judge by judgment and order dated
27.07.2022, dismissed the Special Civil Application
filed by the appellant herein upholding the order
dated 10.01.2017 passed by the Gujarat Civil Services
Tribunal, Gandhinagar in Appeal No. 50 of 2004, in
turn confirming the direction of the Tribunal to pay
to the respondent the first higher pay-scale of Rs.
5000-8000 with effect from 16.06.1999 in the cadre of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/658/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2023
undefined
Senior Clerk.
2.1 It is this judgment and order, which is sought
to be called in question by the appellant by filing
the present Letters Patent Appeal under clause 15 of
the Letters Patent.
3. The respondent who was Senior Clerk in the
Taluka Panchayat Office, Anand, approached the
Gujarat Civil Services Tribunal with a grievance that
he was not being granted the higher pay-scale. The
panchayat had refused the benefit of higher pay-scale
to the respondent by order dated 16.12.2003.
3.1 The case of the respondent before the Tribunal
was that since he had completed 9 years in a single
cadre, he became entitled to receive first higher
pay-scale. The claim of the respondent was based on
Resolutions dated 05.07.1991 and 16.08.1994 of the
Finance Department, which provided for the scheme to
be extended of higher pay-scale to the Government
employees who stagnate in one cadre.
3.2 The Tribunal on facts, found the petitioner to
be entitled to the benefit since he had completed the
requisite number of years to fulfil the conditions of
the scheme to be applied for extension of the benefit
of higher pay-scale.
3.3 The Special Civil Application was filed by the
District Panchayat taking exception to the order of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/658/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2023
undefined
the Service Tribunal, which treated the petitioner to
be entitled to receive the first higher pay-scale.
4. It was contended that the Tribunal committed an
error in granting higher pay-scale to the petitioner
with effect from 16.06.1999. According to the case
of the District Panchayat, the respondent herein was
not fulfilling the requisite conditions.
4.1 Learned Single Judge after examining the order
of the Tribunal and revisiting with the facts,
observed in para 5 of the order, inter alia thus,
"From the record, it appears that the petitioner
was promoted as Senior Clerk on 16.06.1990 and
thereafter, was promoted as Deputy Accountant by
order dated 29.03.2005. Apparently, the
petitioner had continued on the post of Senior
Clerk since 1990 to 2005. It is coming on record
that the petitioner was given higher pay scale
in the cadre of Senior Clerk w.e.f. 2002. The
Tribunal has taken into consideration the
relevant portion of the resolution of 1994 and
after considering the fact that the petitioner
who was promoted in the year 1990 in the cadre
of Senior Clerk has continued as such for more
than period of 9 years and therefore, has held
that in the year 1999, the petitioner having
completed period of 9 years was entitled to the
benefit as per the Government Resolution of
1994."
5. When the facts of the case and the findings
recorded by the learned Single Judge are examined
with reference to the relevant condition of the
Resolution dated 16.08.1994, condition no. 3(2)
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/658/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2023
undefined
provides that first higher pay-scale shall be granted
to the employee who has completed 9 years of service
in the concerned cadre and pay-scale. It is the
condition however for entitlement of the first higher
grade scale that the employee should not have got
more than two promotions earlier. The 9 years
service in the same cadre was indicative that the
service was regular and was rendered in the same
cadre, as further contemplated in the condition.
5.1 There is no gainsaying that, in the facts of the
present case, the petitioner had earlier not earned
two promotions. He was promoted only once. As far
as condition of completion of 9 years in one cadre is
concerned, he was promoted as Senior Clerk on
16.06.1990 and thereafter, came to be promoted as
Deputy Accountant by order dated 29.03.2005.
Therefore, in the cadre of Senior Clerk, the
respondent completed 9 years to fulfill the condition
to be granted the higher pay-scale.
5.2 A vain attempt was made by the learned advocate
for the appellant that the employee should have
stagnated in one cadre and that aspect was not
satisfied. The submission was misconceived inasmuch
as the working as Senior Clerk since 1990 till 2005
was nothing but stagnation in the said cadre and
since 9 years' service in single cadre was
completed, the respondent became entitled to get the
first higher pay-scale as per the scheme and
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/658/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/08/2023
undefined
conditions reflected in the aforementioned Government
Resolution dated 16.08.1994.
6. No error whatsoever could be said to have been
committed by learned Single Judge in confirming the
order of the Gujarat Civil Services Tribunal in
entitling the petitioner to receive first higher pay-
scale. The challenge in this Letters Patent Appeal
stands meritless.
7. The appeal is summarily dismissed.
Civil Application is disposed of in view of the
disposal of the Letters Patent Appeal.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ)
(N.V.ANJARIA, J)
BIJOY B. PILLAI
