Gujarat High Court
Vitthalbhai Ramjibhai Vagadiya vs Rajkot Municipal Corporation on 1 April, 2024
Author: Biren Vaishnav
Bench: Biren Vaishnav
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/116/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/04/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 116 of 2024
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5883 of 2018
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 117 of 2024
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5882 of 2018
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 118 of 2024
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5884 of 2018
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 124 of 2024
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5881 of 2018
==========================================================
VITTHALBHAI RAMJIBHAI VAGADIYA
Versus
RAJKOT MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ANAND B GOGIA(5849) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS KAJAL L KALWANI(6623) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS MUSKAN A GOGIA(6624) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI DHRUVE, ASST GOVERNMENT PLEADER/PP for the
Respondent(s) No. 2
MR KV GADHIA(319) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 01/04/2024
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV)
1. These appeals have been filed by the appellants, who
were the original petitioners before the learned Single
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/116/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/04/2024
undefined
Judge. The learned Single Judge by a common order
dated 07.07.2022 dismissed the petitions of the
appellants herein.
2. For the purpose of this order, facts of Letters Patent
Appeal No. 116 of 2024 are discussed.
2.1 It is the case of the appellant petitioner that he was
holding a qualification of Diploma in Civil Engineering.
On 12.08.1975, he came to be appointed as Assistant
Surveyor. With effect from 13.07.1984, he was promoted
to the post of Planning Assistant. The pay-scale of the
Planning Assistant was revised to that of Rs.1640-2900.
It is the case of the petitioner that the State Government
vide notification dated 20.03.1991 created two pay-scales,
one of Rs.2000-3200 which was given to the degree
holders in Civil Engineering and the other of Rs.1640-
2900 to the diploma holders in Civil Engineering. The
corporation adopted the same on 18.11.1991.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/116/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/04/2024
undefined
2.2 It is the case of the petitioners that the State
Government's association of class-III technical employees
approached this court by filing Special Civil Application
No. 7950 of 1995 challenging the notification of
20.03.1991. This court by an order dated 11.06.2012
quashed the said notification. The same was confirmed in
appeal before the Division Bench as well as the Apex
Court. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner
having retired on 30.06.2000 made several
representations prior thereto in the years 2017-18 and
2018-19 requesting the Corporation that his pay-scale be
revised to Rs.2000-3200.
3. Mr. Anand Gogia, learned counsel for the appellants
would submit that the appellants were entitled to the pay-
scale of Rs.2000-3200. He would rely on the notification
of the Rajkot Municipal Corporation which defined the
recruitment rules for the post of Planning Assistant.
Relying on the recruitment rules dated 19.06.1992, he
would submit that Planning Assistants who were
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/116/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/04/2024
undefined
promoted were entitled to the pay-scale of Rs.2000-3200.
Reliance was also placed on the resolution dated
13.04.1998 passed by the Municipal Corporation adopting
the pay-scales as applicable to the State Government. He
would therefore submit that the valid right to the
appellants accrued for fixation of their pay in the pay-
scale of Rs.2000-3200 in light of the judgment and order
of the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application
No.7950 of 1995 which was confirmed by the Division
Bench in appeal and also confirmed before the Apex
Court. Mr. Gogia would submit that the appellants
therefore were entitled to the pay-scale of Rs.2000-3200.
4. Mr. Yogi Gadhia, learned advocate appearing for the
respondent Corporation would take us through the
affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the Corporation and
submit that if the rules of 1992 are seen, it categorically
states that Planning Assistants irrespective of their
qualification had the pay-scale of Rs.1640-2600 and
therefore the contention of learned counsel for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/116/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/04/2024
undefined
appellants that they were entitled to the pay-scale of
Rs.2000-3200 was misconceived. He would submit that
no Planning Assistant in the Rajkot Municipal Corporation
was ever given the pay-scale of Rs.2000-3200.
4.1 Inviting our attention to the affidavit in reply filed on
behalf of the Corporation, he would submit that the
learned Single Judge rightly dismissed the petition in
limine. He would submit that the petitioners have filed
the petitions as an afterthought after having retired in the
year 2000 and after the order passed by the Apex Court
in the year 2013. He would submit that even otherwise it
was categorically pointed out in paragraph no. 13 of the
affidavit to indicate that it is not the case of the
appellants that they were getting a pay-scale lower than
that of the degree holders. Admittedly, therefore, the
appellants are not entitled to any relief.
5. Having considered the submissions made by the
learned advocates for the respective parties, it will be in
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/116/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/04/2024
undefined
the fitness of things to reproduce the relevant portion of
the order of the learned Single Judge in which the
prayers of the petitioners - appellants have been
formulated and reproduced. The same reads as under:
"1. These group of petitions under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India are filed with following
prayers :.
"A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to
issue a writ of or in the nature of mandamus
or any other appropriate writ, order or
direction commanding respondent authorities
to finalise the payment of the differential
amount of pay scale along with other
consequential benefits commutation in
pension, gratuity, leave encashment etc.;
B) Further be pleased to direct the
respondent authorities to make payment of
interest on delayed of payment of differential
amount and consequential benefits, and
C) Pending admission and final disposal of
this petition, the Hon'ble Court may be please
to direct the respondent authorities to
calculate the difference amount of pay scale
and other consequential benefits and finalise
the case of the petitioner within such time
limit as may be deemed thought fit, just
proper in the interest of justice."
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/116/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/04/2024
undefined
5.1 Coming to the issue of two different pay-scales
granted to degree holders and diploma holders in Civil
Engineering vide notification dated 20.03.1991 and that
the same having been set aside by this court by an order
dated 11.06.2012 and therefore the entitlement of the
appellants being given the pay-scales is concerned, what
needs to be noticed is that after having superannuated in
they year 2000, based on a decision which was rendered
in the year 2012 and confirmed by the Apex Court in the
year 2013, the petitioners - appellants sought to
approach this court by filing the respective petitions in
2018. Obviously therefore it is a clear case where after
having accepted the pay-scales and after having retired
from service, after more than 18 years in the case of
appellant of Letters Patent Appeal No. 116 of 2024, the
prayers in the nature so reproduced hereinabove were
sought.
6. There is one more reason why we are not inclined to
accept the submissions of learned counsel for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/116/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/04/2024
undefined
appellant. Reading of the notification of 16.04.1992
would indicate that admittedly the only pay-scale that was
available to the Planning Assistants was that of Rs.1640-
2900. Nowhere in the petition or in the pleadings it was
the case of the appellants that there were Planning
Assistants who were drawing the pay-scale of Rs.2000-
3200 and accordingly that their pay-scales must be
revised so as to bring in conformity with similarly
situated Planning Assistants. Reading of the petitions
would indicate that the entire case of the appellants was
based on the decision in the case of Special Civil
Application No. 7950 of 1995 which attained finality in
the year 2013 in favour of the petitioners therein. It is
only thereafter that the appellants after having
superannuated thought of exercising their rights to claim
the pay-scale of Rs.2000-3200. We agree with the
submission of Mr. Gadhia, learned counsel for the
Corporation that by their conduct the appellants have
shown that they were fence sitters waiting for the
outcome of the litigation at the hands of their counter
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/116/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/04/2024
undefined
parts in the State Government.
7. From the affidavit in reply and the notifications
annexed thereto, it is proved that the case of the
appellants that the State Government's notification for
revision of pay in the pay-scales of Rs.2000-3200 was
adopted by the State is misconceived. During the course
of arguments in support of this contention Mr. Gogia
relied on the notification of the State that the resolution
of the Corporation dated 13.04.1998. Reading the
resolution would indicate that such resolution was only
for the purpose of awarding the benefits of Fifth Pay
Commission and adopting the benefits thereto viz-a-viz
the Corporation. It no way indicates that a pay-scale of
Rs.2000-3200 be given to the concerned appellants.
8. Having therefore independently examined the case
of the appellants and in addition thereto having seen the
reasoning of the learned Single Judge, we are of the
opinion that the appeals lack merit.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/116/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/04/2024
undefined
9. The appeals are accordingly dismissed with no order
as to costs.
(BIREN VAISHNAV, J)
(PRANAV TRIVEDI,J)
DIVYA
