Gujarat High Court
Parsottam Umedbhai Parmar vs State Of Gujarat on 8 April, 2025
Author: Nirzar S. Desai
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/15229/2024 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15229 of 2024
=====================================================
PARSOTTAM UMEDBHAI PARMAR & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
=====================================================
Appearance:
MR HB SINGH(2073) for the petitioners(s) No. 1,2
MR SANJAY UDHWANI ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
=====================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 08/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of this petition, the petitioner have
prayed for multi-fold reliefs. However, learned
advocate Mr. Singh appearing for the petitioners,
upon instruction, states that at this juncture,
keeping all the rights and contentions of the
petitioners open, the petitioners are pressing only
for prayer made in paragraph No. 10(D) which reads as
under :-
"[D] Be pleased to direct the respondent
authorities to decide the representation
dated 07.04.2024 and 22.06.2024 made by
the petitioners to the respondent
authorities within a stipulated time and
extend the benefit as have been granted to
other similarly situated employees, in
accordance with judgment dated 29-06-2018
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/15229/2024 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2025
undefined
in Letters Patent Appeals No.380 of 2016
and allied matters."
2. Learned advocate Mr. Singh would submit that the
case of the present petitioners being squarely
covered by decision of Hon'ble Division Bench of this
Court rendered in Letters Patent Appeal No.380 of
2016 and allied matters dated 29.06.2018, the
grievance raised by the present petitioners at this
stage could be assuaged if representations which
would be preferred by the petitioners relying upon
the said judgment may be directed to be decided by
the respondents within a specific period of time.
3. Considering the submission made by learned
advocate Mr. Singh, since the same appears to be
reasonable, the following directions are passed :-
"(i) The petitioners, in addition to the
representations already preferred dated
07.04.2024 and 22.06.2024, shall prefer
fresh representations pointing out how
their case is similar to the case of the
of 2016 and allied matters and whereas,
such representation shall be preferred by
the petitioners within a period of two
weeks from today.
(ii) Upon such representation being
received by the respondents, the same
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/15229/2024 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2025
undefined
shall be considered and decided by them
within a period of six weeks thereafter,
more particularly taking into account the
communication of the respondent herein,
whereby the proposals in case of the
present petitioners is stated to be
pending.
(iii) It is directed that if the
petitioners are similarly situated to the
employees in Letters Patent Appeal No.380
of 2016, then the benefits as made
available to the said employees may be
passed on to the present petitioners as
expeditiously, but not later than six
weeks from the date of decision as per
3(ii), as above.
(iv) In case the present petitioners are
aggrieved by the decision of the
respondents, then it would be open for the
petitioners to question the same before
appropriate forum in accordance with law."
4. With the above observations and directions, the
present petition stands disposed of. Needless to
clarify that this Court has not entered into the
merits of the matter. Direct service is permitted.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
Pallavi
