Gujarat High Court
Vinodchandra Jagjivandas Judhdhawala vs State Of Gujarat on 22 April, 2025
Author: Nirzar S. Desai
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/23031/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.23031 of 2022
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO.1 of 2025
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.23031 of 2022
=========================================
VINODCHANDRA JAGJIVANDAS JUDHDHAWALA & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
=========================================
Appearance :
MR NK MAJMUDAR for the Petitioners.
MR ADITYA DAVDA, AGP for the Respondents.
=========================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 22/04/2025
COMMON ORAL ORDER
1. By way of Civil Application, the applicants - original
petitioners have prayed to direct the respondents to consider and
decide representations dated 3.11.2020, 9.11.2021, 7.2.2022 and
23.3.2022 preferred by the applicants expeditiously.
2. By way of the main writ petition, the petitioners have
prayed for grant of higher pay scale on completion of prescribed
period of services as per G.R. dated 16.8.1994 and other
consequential reliefs.
3. Today, learned advocate Mr. Shivam Majmudar
appearing for the petitioners has submitted that if the petitioners'
representation dated 3.11.2020 is directed to be decided, that
would serve the purpose of the petitioners as rest of the
representations were made to the authorities which were not
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/23031/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2025
undefined
empowered to decide the issue. He further submitted that if the
above direction is issued, the petitioners will not press the prayers
made in the writ petition with a liberty to file fresh petition in case
the outcome of the representation is against the petitioners. He
further submitted that if the above direction is issued, the main
matter as well as civil application may be disposed of. He further
submitted that though the issue is covered by judgment dated
29.6.2018 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.380 of 2016, the
respondents are not considering the representation in light of
above decision and therefore, the respondents may be directed to
decide the representation of the petitioners dated 3.11.2020 at the
earliest and to pass a speaking order as the issue is covered.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Aditya
Davda appearing for the respondents though submitted that the
petitioners case is different than the case of the petitioners of
Letters Patent Appeal No.380 of 2016. Learned Assistant
Government Pleader Mr. Davda further submitted that as far as the
representation dated 3.11.2020 is concerned, if the respondents
are directed to decide the same in accordance with law, the Court
may issue suitable direction.
5. I have heard learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties and perused the record. As learned advocate Mr.
Majmudar appearing for the petitioners at the time of dictation
submitted that the issue is squarely covered in view of observations
made by the Division Bench of this Court in paragraph No.21.1 of
Letters Patent Appeal No.380 of 2016 dated 29.6.2018, this Court
may direct the respondents to consider the petitioners
representation in light of observations made in paragraph No.21.1
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/23031/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2025
undefined
of the above decision and in case if, the respondents do not grant
the benefits as prayed for to the petitioners, the respondents may
be directed to pass a reasoned order as to how the observations
made in the above decision rendered in Letters Patent Appeal
No.380 of 2016 is not applicable in the facts of the present
petitioners.
6. In view of above, the respondents are directed to
decide the petitioners representation dated 3.11.2020 at the
earliest but in any case before 31.7.2025 and in case if, the
respondents takes a view that the petitioners are not entitled to the
benefits prayed for by them in light of decision referred herein
above, the respondents are directed to pass a reasoned order and
to assign reasons as to how the decision dated 29.6.2018 passed in
Letters Patent Appeal No.380 of 2016 is not applicable in case of
present petitioners. Needless to say that in case if, the decision
goes against the petitioners, it will be open for the petitioners to
challenge the same.
7. With the aforesaid observations, without entering into
the merits of the matter, the petition as well as civil application are
disposed of. In case the representation of the petitioners is
considered positively, in that case, from the date of order, the
respondents are directed to extend the benefits to the petitioners
within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the
order. Direct service is permitted.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
SAVARIYA
