Gujarat High Court
Rasanbhai Lalsinghbhai Damor vs State Of Gujarat on 11 January, 2023
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
C/SCA/17951/2022 ORDER DATED: 11/01/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17951 of 2022
==========================================================
RASANBHAI LALSINGHBHAI DAMOR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DIPAK R DAVE(1232) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
MS CHAITALI P DAVE(11693) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
Date : 11/01/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
is filed with following prayer(s):-
"6 (A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of
mandamus and/or a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or
any other appropriate writ, order or direction:-
(i) to hold and declare that action on the part of the
respondents in not making full payment of pensionary
benefits to the petitioner no.1 and husband of the
petitioner no.2 by counting their entire length of service
from the date of joining till date of retirement as illegal,
unjustified, arbitrary and further be pleased to direct the
respondents to re-fix the pension of the petitioners by
counting their service from the date of joining until the
date of retirement and fix the pension accordingly.
(ii) to hold and declare that the petitioners shall be paid
all other benefits like public holidays, transport,
allowance, medical allowance, group insurance at par wit
the permanent employees.
(iii) to hold and declare that the petitioners are entitled
to benefits of leave encashment at par with permanent
employees and be pleased to further direct the
respondents to pay an amount of leave encashment of
leave standing in the account of the petitioners.
(iv) to direct the respondents to pay difference of
pensionary benefits, gratuity amount, other benefits and
leave encashment with 18 interest from the date when it
fell due.
C/SCA/17951/2022 ORDER DATED: 11/01/2023
(B) ...
(C)... "
2. In all, the petitioners are claiming 6(six) reliefs, which are
based on the decision of Division Bench of this Court. Learned
advocate for the petitioners has drawn attention of this Court to
such decision in a group petitions being Letters Patent Appeal
No.1567 of 2018 in Special Civil Application No.6707 of 2013 &
allied matters. Learned advocate for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are also identically situated, and therefore, the
claim of the petitioners is required to be considered.
3. Learned advocate Ms.Dave has drawn attention of this
Court to the affidavit-in-reply of the respondent, but is unable to
contest the position where the Division Bench of this Court has
already granted the benefits. The benefits, as are enumerated by
the Single Judge in the Writ Petition and confirmed by the
Division Bench are as under:-
Sr. Benefits Judgment / Orders Relevant
No. Para
1. Public (I) CAV Judgment dated 14.10.2004
Holiday passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in
Letters Patent Appeal No.1037 of 2004.
(ii) Order dated 08.04.2005 passed in
Special Leave to Appeal (CC) No.3719 OF
2005. The said Special Leave to Appeal was
filed against the judgment and order dated
14.10.2004 passed in Letters Patent
Appeal No.1037 of 2004.
(iii) State of Gujarat & Anr. Vs.
Mahendrakumar Bhagvandas & Anr.
[2011(2) GLR 1290]
2. Transport State of Gujarat & Anr. Vs.
Allowance Mahendrakumar Bhagvandas & Anr.
C/SCA/17951/2022 ORDER DATED: 11/01/2023
[2011(2) GLR 1290]
3. Leave State of Gujarat & Anr. Vs.
Encashment Mahendrakumar Bhagvandas & Anr.
at the time of [2011(2) GLR 1290]
retirement
and death
4. Counting of (I) Tribhovanbhai Jerambhai vs.
service from Dy.Executive Engineer, Sub-Division, R &
the date of B Deptt & Anr., [1998 (2) GLH 1]
joining for the
purpose of (ii) Oral order dated 06.08.1998 passed in
pension. LPA No.1495 of 1997 in SCA No.7539 of
1997 (Chhaganbhai Ranchodbhai Rathod
vs. Dy.Executive Engineer).
(iii) Order order dated 14.12.2005 passed
in SCA No.788 of 2005 (Shyam B Salunkhe
vs. Dy.Executive Engineer).
(iv) MANU/GJ/0072/2007 (Sultan Ibrahim
Mansuri vs. State of Gujarat & Ors.)
(v) Oral judgment dated 30.01.1996 passed
in SCA No.3607 of 1982.
(vi) State of Gujarat & Anr. vs.
Mahendrakumar Bhagvandas & Anr [2001
(2) GLR 1290]
5. Medical State of Gujarat & Anr. vs.
Allowance Mahendrakumar Bhagvandas & Anr. [2011
(2) GLR 1290]
6. Group State of Gujarat & Anr. Vs.
Insurance Mahendrakumar Bhagvandas & Anr.
[2011(2) GLR 1290]
4. Attention is also drawn to a decision of the Apex Court
where in case all the 5 (five) benefits granted to the daily wagers
claiming benefit under Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988
has been confirmed by the order of the Apex Court. It is also
submitted that based on the decision of the Apex Court, another
set of L.P.A came to be disposed of vide order dated 08.12.2022
passed in group of LPAs being Letters Patent Appeal No.27 of
2022 & allied matters.
C/SCA/17951/2022 ORDER DATED: 11/01/2023
5. In that view of the matter, it is hereby declared that the
petitioners herein are entitled to the benefits, as prayed for,
which would include :-
"(i) to hold and declare that action on the part of the
respondents in not making full payment of pensionary
benefits to the petitioner no.1 and husband of the petitioner
no.2 by counting their entire length of service from the date
of joining till date of retirement as illegal, unjustified,
arbitrary and further be pleased to direct the respondents to
re-fix the pension of the petitioners by counting their service
from the date of joining until the date of retirement and fix
the pension accordingly.
(ii) to hold and declare that the petitioners shall be paid
all other benefits like public holidays, transport,
allowance, medical allowance, group insurance at par wit
the permanent employees.
(iii) to hold and declare that the petitioners are entitled
to benefits of leave encashment at par with permanent
employees and be pleased to further direct the
respondents to pay an amount of leave encashment of
leave standing in the account of the petitioners.
(iv) to direct the respondents to pay difference of
pensionary benefits, gratuity amount, other benefits and
leave encashment with 18 interest from the date when it
fell due"
6. With the aforesaid, the present petition stands allowed.
Considering the fact that the petitioner no.1 being senior citizen,
whereas the petitioner no.2 being represented by legal heirs, the
Department may disburse the amount admissible, as
expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 6(six)
months from today.
(A.Y. KOGJE, J)
GIRISH
