Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Kanchanben Kalubhai Parmar on 21 February, 2025
Author: A. S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia, Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/29/2024 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 29 of 2024
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16847 of 2018
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 2 of 2023
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 29 of 2024
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 370 of 2024
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16298 of 2018
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 2 of 2023 In R/LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL NO. 370 of 2024
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16298 of 2018
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 34 of 2024
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8463 of 2022
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 2 of 2023 In R/LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL NO. 34 of 2024
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8463 of 2022
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 33 of 2024
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8358 of 2022
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 2 of 2023 In R/LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL NO. 33 of 2024
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8358 of 2022
=============================================
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
Versus
KANCHANBEN KALUBHAI PARMAR
=============================================
Appearance:
MS SHRUTI R. DHRUVE, AGP for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR GAURAV CHUDASAMA(5660) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 21/02/2025
COMMON ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/29/2024 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
1. The present appeals filed by the State Government
emanate from the decisions of the learned Single Judges,
whereby the issue of seniority and regularization of those
employees, who are appointed for a period of 5 years on fixed
pay and have sought request transfer was examined. Initially,
such issue arose in the Forest Department in case of Forest
Guards. The learned Single Judge by the judgment dated
08.03.2022 passed in Special Civil Application No.16299 of
2018, allowed the writ petition of the Forest Guards, by
considering the various judgments passed by this Court
including the Supreme Court by holding thus : -
"12. Merely because by resolutions post their appointment
i.e. on 18.01.2017 and 20.01.2018, the benefit of the
entire period of five years of fixed pay services is being
given to the petitioners, the loss of seniority of two
years will cumulatively damage the case of the petitioners
in the matters of promotion etc., inasmuch as, by virtue
of the resolutions and the appointees post these two
resolutions of 2017 and 2018, the petitioners will
continue to stagnate because the appointees post these
resolutions will steal a march over the petitioners. That
could not have been the intention of the undertaking when
the petitioners filed such undertakings in the year 2015
when they opted for transfer.
13. The case of Uttam Pawar (supra) relies on the decision
in case of Raksha Mantri (supra). Considering the decision
of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court held as under:
"7. The respondent herein was working as a Telephone
Operator in Irrigation Department of the State of
Maharashtra. Thereafter he made a request for his transfer
from Mumbai Zone to Kolhapur Zone. The request of the
respondent was acceded to and he was transferred on his
own request from Mumbai Zone to Kolhapur Zone and he lost
his seniority in Mumbai Zone and he joined in Kolhapur
Zone on 14.6.1990 as a Junior Clerk at zero seniority.
Thereafter, the State Government passed a Resolution dated
8.6.1995 giving a Time Bound Promotion to the persons who
are stagnated in the Group C and D cadres for a long
period. As per the said Resolution those persons who have
put in 12 years of service and who fulfill other
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/29/2024 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
conditions laid down in the said Resolution were eligible
for the next higher scale of pay. We are not concerned
with the other conditions laid down in the Resolution
dated 8.6.1995. We are only concerned with the limited
question that whether the respondent is entitled to count
his service rendered in the Mumbai Zone when he was
transferred to Kolhapur Zone for purposes of computing 12
years of service so as to enable him to get the benefit of
this Resolution. The Tribunal granted the benefit of past
service to the respondent and the same was affirmed by the
Division Bench of the High Court."
14. Accordingly, the petition being Special Civil
Application Nos.16299 of 2018 and 16729 of 2020 are
allowed. The petitioners' undertaking shall not count to
their detriment for the purposes of their seniority. The
undertaking shall not operate and their seniority shall be
counted from the date of their initial appointment post
the period of five years in view of the resolutions dated
18.01.2017 and 20.01.2018."
2. Accordingly, the State Government accepted the said
judgment rendering the case of the Forest Department and
issued a Circular dated 16.05.2022 in line with the judgment
passed by the learned Single Judge.
3. Thereafter, the present respondents, who are serving
under the appellant - Revenue Department approached this
Court and filed various writ petitions claiming similar benefit,
which has been extended to the employees of the Forest
Department. The learned Single Judge, after placing reliance
on the aforenoted judgment and the Resolutions dated
18.01.2017 and 20.01.2018 issued by the State Government,
allowed the writ petitions by holding that the petitioners i.e.
the respondent - employees are also equally entitled to the
benefits of such resolutions and the period of five years, which
they have put in on fixed pay, is required to be treated in
service towards their seniority.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/29/2024 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
4. In fact in one of the matter before us being Letters Patent
Appeal No.805 of 2023 and allied matters, the State
Government, while placing reliance on the aforesaid
Government Resolution dated 18.01.2017 issued by the
Finance Department, has contended that the benefits arising
from the aforesaid resolution, more particularly as envisaged
in such policy, is applicable to the employees, who are
appointed on five years on fixed pay.
5. We may, at this stage, refer to the Government
Resolution dated 18.01.2017, which is further issued clarifying
the Policy of the State Government ad hoc - fixed pay
appointments. Paragraph No.2 of the Government Resolution,
which is issued by the Finance Department is translated and
reproduced as under:-
"Presently, the lump sum pay tenure of five years for the
employees appointed under the Fixed Pay Scheme, is not
being taken into consideration for any service
related/employment related issues. After due
consideration, the State Government has also resolved in
this regard that the service of five years in respect of
the fixed pay employees appointed under Scheme dated
16/02/2006 of the Finance Department, shall be considered
as the service tenure for promotion, seniority, higher
grade pay scale and retirement benefits admissible at the
time of superannuation."
6. As per the aforementioned paragraph, five years of ad
hoc service on fixed pay of those employees, who are
appointed as per the Policy of the State Government dated
16.02.2006 is required to be considered for the purpose of
promotion, seniority, higher grade pay as well as retirement
benefits. Thus, five years of fixed pay is considered for the
purpose of promotion and seniority.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/29/2024 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
7. Thereafter, the Resolution dated 18.01.2017, which has
been issued by the Finance Department is followed by the
other departments of the State. The policy of the State
Government is uniformly applied to the State Departments
also, including the present appellants.
8. Thus, the issue raised in the present appeals is no more
res integra, the same is answered by the various judgments of
this Court.
9. Accordingly, the present appeals fail. The same are
dismissed accordingly. As a sequel, the connected civil
applications also stand disposed of accordingly.
10. Registry to place a copy of this order in each of the
connected matters.
Sd/-
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
Sd/-
(GITA GOPI,J)
MAHESH/38
