Gujarat High Court
District Development Officer vs Gujarat Rajya Nivrut Karmachari ... on 29 January, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia, Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/191/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 191 of 2025
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 536 of 2024
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025
In
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 191 of 2025
==========================================================
DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
Versus
GUJARAT RAJYA NIVRUT KARMACHARI SAKHAVATI MAHAMANDAL
THROUGH MAHAMANTRI CHANDULAL VISHARAM JOSHI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS ARCHANA R ACHARYA(2475) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI DHURVE AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4
MR AS ASTHAVADI(3698) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 29/01/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. It is submitted that the present order is confined to the
employees at Sr. Nos.25, 52, 63, 67, 68, 100, 116, 122, 131,
132, 186, 251, 255, 256, and 271 at Annexure-D, Page-45 of
the petition, as they are the employees of the District
Panchayat.
2. It is an established fact that there are various Writ
Petitions filed by numerous employees after the judgment was
rendered by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil
Application No.10308 of 2021 dated 11.08.2021. It is also not
in dispute that in various High Courts of the country, such
issue about grant of one increment accruing on 1 st July to its
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/191/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
employees and who had retired on 30 th June, was raised and
examined by different High Courts. Ultimately, the Supreme
Court in the judgment in the case of Director (Admn. and HR)
KPTCL and Others v. C.P. Mundinamani and Others, dated
11.04.2023, disposed of the Special Leave Petition on
identical issue.
3. It appears that thereafter, a review application was filed
before the Supreme Court on the very said judgment being
Misc. Civil Application (Diary) No.2400 of 2024 in Special
Leave Petition (Civil) No.4722 of 2021. By the order dated
06.09.2024, the Supreme Court again clarified with regard to
entitlement of one increment to such employees who are
similarly situated to the opponent.
4. The Supreme Court has held thus:-
"The issue raised in the present applications requires
consideration, insofar as the date of applicability of the judgment
dated 11.04.2023 in Civil Appeal No. 2471/2023, titled "Director
(Admn. and HR) KPTCL and Others v. C.P. Mundinamani and
Others", to third parties is concerned.
We are informed that a large number of fresh writ petitions have
been filed.
To prevent any further litigation and confusion, by of an interim
order we direct that:
(a) The judgment dated 11.04.2023 will be given effect to in
case of third parties from the date of the judgment, that is, the
pension by taking into account one increment will be payable on
and after 01.05.2023. Enhanced pension for the period prior to
31.04.2023 will not be paid.
(b) For persons who have filed writ petitions and succeeded, the
directions given in the said judgment will operate as res judicata,
and accordingly, an enhanced pension by taking one increment
would have to be paid.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/191/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
(c) The direction in (b) will not apply, where the judgment has
not attained finality, and cases where an appeal has been
preferred, or if filed, is entertained by the appellate court.
(d) In case any retired employee has filed any application for
intervention/impleadment in Civil Appeal No. 3933/2023 or any
other writ petition and a beneficial order has been passed, the
enhanced pension by including one increment will be payable from
the month in which the application for intervention/impleadment
was filed.
This interim order will continue till further orders of this Court.
However, no person who has already received an enhanced
pension including arrears, will be affected by the directions in (a),
(c) and (d)."
5. In the meantime, the State Government, on dismissal of
the Special Leave Petition, had also framed policy regulating
grant of one increment in line of the order passed by the
Supreme Court. However, when the recent order dated
06.09.2024 was passed by the Supreme Court clarifying its
earlier order, the State Government has withdrawn the policy.
6. It is also not in dispute that the learned Single Judge as
well as the Division Bench have placed reliance on the
judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of C.P.
Mundinamani (supra) for taking similar view.
7. In light of subsequent development, the State
Government has filed the present Letters Patent Appeal on the
order passed by the learned Single Judge. We have noticed
that there are numerous Letters Patent Appeals filed either by
the State Government or by various bodies of the State
Government on the basis of the order passed by the Supreme
Court. In fact, in some matters, the learned advocates
appearing for the employees have consented for passing
orders in Letters Patent Appeals in line of the order dated
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/191/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
06.09.2024 passed by the Supreme Court in the review
application in case of C.P. Mundinamani (supra).
8. The aforesaid fact is not denied by the employees that in
identical facts and on the similar judgments, this Court has
entertained the Letters Patent Appeals. For brevity, we are
not inclined to refer to the numbers of such Appeals.
9. Thus, in order to see that uniformity is maintained in all
such cases and all the employees are treated at par with the
directions issued by the Supreme Court, we are inclined to
dispose of the Letters Patent Appeal in conformity with the
order dated 06.09.2024 passed by the Supreme Court in Misc.
Civil Application (Diary) No.2400 of 2024 in Special Leave
Petition (Civil) No.4722 of 2021.
10. Thus, the present appeal is disposed of in terms of the
order passed by the Supreme Court. The date of conferring of
the benefit of one increment shall be extended to the
employees in light of the aforesaid order.
11. The present appeal is disposed of in the above terms of
employees at Sr. Nos.25, 52, 63, 67, 68, 100, 116, 122, 131,
132, 186, 251, 255, 256, and 271 at Annexure-D, Page-45 of
the petition. As a sequel, the connected Civil Application also
stands disposed of.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
(GITA GOPI,J)
Pankaj /3
