Gujarat High Court
Pinakin Narendrabhai Patel vs Gujarat Energy Transmission ... on 29 January, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/297/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 297 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
==========================================================
PINAKIN NARENDRABHAI PATEL
Versus
GUJARAT ENERGY TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LTD. & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR YOGEN N PANDYA(5766) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS.SURBHI BHATI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR PREMAL R JOSHI(1327) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 29/01/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This petition is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India challenging the award passed by
the Industrial Tribunal, Vadodara in reference IT No.165
of 2019 dated 15.04.2024 by which the Industrial
Tribunal has granted the notional benefits from
01.07.1990 and pay scale of 1180-3050 notionally
instead of actually.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/297/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was
appointed as a Meter Tester from 17.06.1989 in the pay
scale of 890-220 on Grade-III. Petitioner possessing the
qualification of diploma electrical and on 15.03.1990, he
applied for Grade-I from Grade-II to the Gujarat
Electricity Board. It is claimed by the petitioner that
similarly situated employees namely Mr.D.L.Parmar and
Mr.R.H.Mengar were appointed on Grade-III and
thereafter, has been given the benefits of Grade-I pay
scale i.e. 1180-3050. However, though petitioner was
called for the interview, but has not been given the said
benefit for unknown reasons. The dispute was raised
before the Industrial Tribunal which was registered
being Reference IT No.165 of 2019 to decide that
whether the petitioner is entitled for the pay scale of
1180-3050 of Grade-I from the date of his initial
appointment. The Industrial Tribunal after considering
the submission and the evidence placed on record has
allowed the reference filed by the petitioner, however,
pay scale of 1180-3050 was granted notionally from
01.07.1990 to 18.04.1992 till he was actually appointed
on the post of Meter Tester Grade-I. Challenging the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/297/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
above order, granting benefits notionally, the present
petition was filed.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr.Pandya for the petitioner
and learned advocate Mr.Joshi for the respondent.
4. Learned advocate Mr.Pandya submits that though the
juniors to the present petitioner namely Mr.D.L.Parmar
and Mr.R.H.Mengar were granted for the pay scale of
grade 1 i.e. 1180-3050 from the date of their initial
appointment and they had been paid actually. However,
Industrial Court without assigning any reasons has
awarded the benefits notionally.
4.1. Learned advocate Mr.Pandya has relied on the
circular passed by the respondent-Board dated
15.06.1990 wherein, it is held that diploma work
engineers, working below the pay scale of 1180-3050 in
various offices and sub stations of the Board and
amongst these diploma holders, vacancies of PA Grade-I
should be filled up. Learned advocate Mr.Pandya
submits that the petitioner, without having any reasons
has been deprived from the above benefits of the pay
scale from the period of 01.07.1990 to 18.04.1992 and
therefore, order passed by the Industrial Tribunal qua
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/297/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
not granting the actual benefit for the aforesaid period is
required to be set aside.
5. On the other hand learned advocate Mr.Joshi submits
that the petitioner is claiming the benefit of the circular
dated 15.06.1990 and filed the reference in the year
2019. Learned advocate Mr.Joshi submits that in the
reference also no reasons has been stated for filing the
reference after such long period. Learned advocate
Mr.Joshi submits that after assigning detailed reasons,
Industrial Tribunal has awarded the reference in favour
of the petitioner, but the benefit was granted notionally
and therefore, no interference is required.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
advocates, it is undisputed fact that the order passed by
the Industrial Tribunal in Reference (I.T.) No.165 of
2019, directing the respondent to pay the pay scale of
Meter Tester Grade-I from 01.07.1990 is not challenged
by the respondent-Board.
7. The petitioner has challenged the aforesaid order qua
not granting the benefit actually on the ground that
other two similarly situated persons who are junior of
the petitioner were granted the benefit of the circular
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/297/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
dated 15.06.1990 and were placed in the pay scale of
1180-3050 from 18.04.1991. The Industrial Tribunal has
not assigned any reasons for not granting the above
benefits actually, but only has recorded that as the
reference was filed by delayed, therefore, instead of
granting the benefit actually from 01.07.1990, it should
be granted notionally.
8. This Court is of the opinion that when the other similarly
situated persons were granted the benefits from their
initial appointment i.e. 18.04.1991, then the petitioner
cannot be deprived from the benefits from the date of
the circular i.e. 15.06.1990. As the Industrial Tribunal
has granted benefits from 01.07.1990, the same should
be granted actually, instead of notionally.
9. So far as the delay aspect is considered, when the
petitioner was entitled for the benefit which was not
granted, the same would be considered as continuous
wrong and therefore, the benefit cannot be denied for
his legitimate right on the ground of delay. In view of the
same, the present petition is required to be allowed and
the respondent is required to be directed to grant the
benefits from 01.07.1990 to 18.04.1992 on pay scale of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/297/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
1180-3050 actually.
10. Resultantly, this petition is allowed.
(M. K. THAKKER,J)
NIVYA A. NAIR
