District Development Officer vs Monika Nathabhai Raval
2023 Latest Caselaw 4686 Guj

       C/LPA/153/2023                                      ORDER DATED: 20/06/2023




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

              R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.                 153 of 2023

        In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3680 of 2018
                              With
          CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2022
           In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 153 of 2023
==========================================================
                        DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
                                   Versus
                           MONIKA NATHABHAI RAVAL
==========================================================
Appearance:
KAASH K THAKKAR(7332) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
 for the Respondent(s) No. 4,5
SHRUTI DHRUVE, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 3
GAUTAM JOSHI, SR. ADVOCATE with VYOM H SHAH(9387) for the
Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
           and
           HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI

                              Date : 20/06/2023

                             ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)

Heard learned advocate Mr. Kaash Thakkar for the appellant, learned senior advocate Mr.Gautam Joshi assisted by learned advocate Vyom Shah for the respondents 1 and 2 and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Shruti Dhruve for respondent State and its authorities.

2. What is called in question by the District Development Officer in this Letters Patent Appeal preferred under clause 15 of the Letters Patent is judgment and order dated 18.10.2022 of learned Single

C/LPA/153/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/06/2023

Judge, whereby the respondents-original petitioners were held entitled to the benefits of past service treating such services as continuous.

3. Two petitioners prayed in their Special Civil Application to direct the respondents to consider their services rendered on adhoc basis to be continuous for the purpose of reckoning pay and other service benefits. The facts were that the petitioners were appointed as Family Health Workers in the year 2005. At that time they were given orders of appointment for 11 months. Order dated 04.02.2005 which figures on record of the petition indicated that the appointment was on adhoc basis as mentioned in the order, however, what is to be noticed is that at that time itself, the petitioners were placed in the pay-scale of Rs. 3050-4590 admissible to the post of Family Health Workers.

3.1 The petitioners served for five years. Their projected adhoc appointment was continued from time to time for five years. In the year 2010, upon advertisement issued by the respondents, the petitioners got selected on regular basis. The orders of appointment thereafter passed are also on record of the petition. While appointing them as above, the regular pay-scale was sanctioned for the petitioners.

4. While favourably considering the prayer for

C/LPA/153/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/06/2023

counting the earlier services for the purpose of retiral benefits, learned Single Judge did not accept the submission on behalf of the respondent authorities although the petitioners took advantage of participating in the regular selection process and therefore, having taken such advantage, cannot claim benefit for their past service. While so holding, learned Single Judge noticed that at the initial stage itself, the petitioner was placed in the pay- scale. The services continuously obtained of the petitioners indicated that the posts were available and the work was also available to be offered to the petitioners. It was only the selection process, which became instrumental in placing the petitioners as regular in the pay-scale.

4.1 Learned Single Judge has substantiated his reasons by relying on the judmgment in Special Civil Application No. 15228 of 2012 as also in Special Civil Application No. 889 of 2013 to come to the conclusion that in the totality of facts, the past services of the petitioners is liable to be considered, treating them as continuous.

5. No unreasonableness is noticed in the findings recorded by the learned Single Judge warranting any interference in the Letters Patent jurisdiction.

6. It was fairly stated and it is observed by this Court as well that the directions of the learned

C/LPA/153/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/06/2023

Single Judge while allowing the petition only relates to counting the past services as continuous. It does not have the effect of giving any monetary benefits for the past service except that for the purpose of pension and other retiral benefits, such services may be counted.

7. With above observation and clarification, the appeal is dismissed.

Civil Application would not survive and is disposed of in view of the dismissal of the Letters Patent Appeal.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J)

(J. C. DOSHI,J) BIJOY B. PILLAI