Bhanumatiben Jiteshbhai Dave vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 7828 Guj

                                                                                   NEUTRAL CITATION




    C/SCA/7263/2018                                ORDER DATED: 20/10/2023

                                                                                   undefined




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD


            R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7263 of 2018
                                With
            R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13548 of 2020
                                With
            R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5692 of 2021
                                With
            R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 18305 of 2021
                                With
            R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5807 of 2022
                                With
            R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12068 of 2022
                                With
            R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11135 of 2022

==========================================================
                      BHANUMATIBEN JITESHBHAI DAVE
                                 Versus
                           STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS ASHLESHA M PATEL(6127) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR SAHIL TRIVEDI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 (in SCA No.7263/2018
and SCA No.18305/2021)
MR ADITYA PATHAK, AGP for Respondent State (in SCA No.12068/2022)
MR RITURAJ M MEENA(3224) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL

                             Date : 20/10/2023

                              ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate Ms.Ashleesha Patel for the petitioners and learned AGPs Mr.Sahil Trivedi and Aditya Pathak in respective petitions for the respondent-State, learned Advocate Ms.Niyati Chauhan for learned Advocate Mr.Rituraj Meena, learned Advocate Mr.H.S. Munshaw, learned Advocate Mr.Thacker and learned Advocate Mr.K.

                                                                                    NEUTRAL CITATION




  C/SCA/7263/2018                                  ORDER DATED: 20/10/2023

                                                                                   undefined

H. Baxi for the respondents in respective petitions. Since common issue is raised in this group of matters, this Court deems it appropriate, more particularly with the consent of the parties, to hear and decide the present petitions commonly.

2. By way of these petitions, the petitioners inter alia, question the action of the respondent authorities, whereby the petitioners have been denied the benefit of lump sum compensation as per the GR dated 05.07.2011 as modified vide GR dated 07.04.2016, in lieu of compassionate appointment, more particularly, on the ground that the late employee concerned was working on daily wages.

3. Considering the submission of learned advocate for the petitioners and whereas while the issue is sought to be contested by learned Advocates for the respondents, it would appear that the law on this issue is no more res integra. It would appear that the learned Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 14.02.2022, in Special Civil Application No.11554 of 2021, has clearly observed that the legal heirs of the employees of the similar nature as of the present petitioners would be entitled to be considered as permanent daily wager, more particularly, in view of law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in case of Mahendrakumar Bhagwandas Vs.State of Gujarat reported in 2011 (2) GLR 1290 and whereas on such basis the learned Co-ordinate Bench had directed the respondents to consider the case of the respondents therein, for extension of benefits as per GR dated 05.07.2011 and 07.04.2016. It would further appear that Division Bench of this Court in a recent decision dated 24.08.2023, in Letters Patent Appeal No. 934 of 2023 and the allied matters, where the Division Bench was concerned with the issue of similar nature has observed at paragraph. 5.1, which is reproduced as under:

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/7263/2018 ORDER DATED: 20/10/2023

undefined

"The extension of said policy shall not be denied to the petitioners and their claim shall not be rejected on the ground that the deceased employee was a daily wager."

4. Having regard to the above, more particularly, since the issue is no more res integra, in the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioners could not have been denied the benefits of the policy of the State Government on the aforementioned ground.

5. Considering the same, it is directed that the respondents shall consider extending the benefits of GR dated 05.07.2011 and GR dated 07.04.2016, more particularly, for grant of lump sum compensation on the basis of pro rata services rendered by the deceased employees whom the present petitioners represent. Such consideration shall be within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order and whereas the consideration shall be on the basis of the above discussion. Furthermore, the benefits upon positive consideration shall be extended within a period of four weeks thereafter. In case the petitioners are aggrieved by the decision of the respondent then it would be open for the petitioners to revive these petitions.

6. With the observations and directions, the present petitions stand disposed of. Direct service is permitted.

(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J) V.V.P. PODUVAL