Gujarat High Court

Gauswami Mahendrapuri Chimanpuri vs State Of Gujarat on 25 July, 2025

                                                                                                                              NEUTRAL CITATION




                             C/SCA/11995/2018                                                  ORDER DATED: 25/07/2025

                                                                                                                              undefined




                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                                     R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11995 of 2018

                       ==========================================================
                                     GAUSWAMI MAHENDRAPURI CHIMANPURI & ORS.
                                                     Versus
                                            STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
                       ==========================================================
                       Appearance:
                       MILAN R MARUTI(7338) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,10
                       MR. KULDEEP D VAIDYA(7045) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,10,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
                       MS. MANISHA L. SHAH, AAG WITH MR. JAY TRIVEDI, AGP for the
                       Respondent(s) No. 1
                       DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 11,2,3,4,5,6,8,9
                       MR DG SHUKLA(1998) for the Respondent(s) No. 10
                       MR HARSHEEL D SHUKLA(6158) for the Respondent(s) No. 10
                       MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Respondent(s) No. 7
                       ==========================================================

                         CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT

                                                              Date : 25/07/2025
                                                               ORAL ORDER

Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocates for the

respective respondent and learned AGP waives service of

notice of rule on behalf of respective respondents.

1. The present petition is filed by seeking the

following reliefs:

"(a) To admit and allow this petition;

(b) To hold and declare the engagement, by the respondent authorities, of the petitioners on fixed monthly pay on contractual basis, as opposed to the mandate of the Directive principles contained in Articles 39, 41, 42, 43 and

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/11995/2018 ORDER DATED: 25/07/2025

undefined

47 of the Constitution, as also in violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India;

(c) To hold and declare that, the resolution of the Panchayat Rural Housing and Rural Development Department of the Government of Gujarat dated 26-04-2017 (At Annexure-A) and subsequent communication of the Commissioner of the rural Development office dated 04/05-

05-2017 (At Annexure-A) is illegal, improper and bad in law and also contrary to the statutory and fundamental rights of the petitioners and also contrary to the spirit of the Constitution of India.

(d) Be pleased to quash and set aside the resolution of Panchayat Rural Housing And Rural Development Department of the Government of Gujarat dated 09-10-2017 along with work order dated 13-10-2017 of the Commissioner Rural Development Office (At Annexure-B & D) as the same is quite contrary to the principle of fair labor practice and the same is also amounts indirect pressure upon the employees to let go their legitimate, legal, statutory constitutional rights; and

(e) Be pleased to quash and set aside the communication dated 09-08-2017 and 24-07-2017 of the Commissioner, Rural Development Office, addressed to the Director of District Rural Development Agencies along with appraisal form and option form etc. at (Annexure- C) as the same is quite contrary to the principle of fair labor practice and the same is also amounts indirect pressure upon the

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/11995/2018 ORDER DATED: 25/07/2025

undefined

employees to let go their legitimate, legal, statutory and constitutional rights;

(f) Be pleased to quash and set a side the communication dated 26-12-2017 of the Commissioner of Rural Development Office, addressed to the All DDO and Directors of Distrcit Rural Development Agency (At Annexure-F)

(g) To command the respondent authorities to absorb the petitioners in the regular establishment on regular pay scale/pay band;

(h) To direct the respondent authorities to ensure that the petitioners are paid minimum wages prevalent in the State;

(i) To issue a direction commanding the respondent authorities to fix the pay of the petitioners and the same may be directed to be paid from the date on which it is made applicable in comparison with the applicable pay and allowances that are paid to the regular employees of the State Government whose work is identical in nature as that of the petitioners by holding that the petitioners are entitled to equal pay for equal work;

(j) To direct the respondents to strictly comply with the provisions of law as is prevalent in the State in the case of petitioners for considering them as permanent and regular employee and for payment of benefits such as pay fixation, increment, leave, maternity benefit, provident fund, pension and such other benefits;

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/11995/2018 ORDER DATED: 25/07/2025

undefined

(k) To direct the respondents to forthwith regularize the services of the petitioners on the permanent post or alternatively to direct the respondent authorities not to terminate the petitioner's service till the existence of DRDA scheme and not to replace them with other temporary and contractual employees by removing the petitioners from their respective post;

(l) Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, be pleased to stay the further implementation, execution and operation of the impugned resolution of Panchayat Rural Housing And Rural Development Department of the Government of Gujarat dated 26-04-2016 along with communication dated 4/5-05-2017 of the Commissioner Rural Development Office (At Annexure-A); and the resolution of Panchayat Rural Housing And Rural Development Department of the Government of Gujarat dated 09-10-2017 along with work order dated 13-10-2017 of the Commissioner Rural Development Office (At Annexure- B & D) and the communication dated 09-08-2017 and 24- 07-2017 of the Commissioner, Rural Development Office, addressed to the Director of District Rural Development Agencies along with appraisal form and option form etc. at (Annexure- C)

(m) Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, be pleased to stay the further implementation, execution and operation of the impugned communication dated 26-12-2017 of the Commissioner of Rural Development

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/11995/2018 ORDER DATED: 25/07/2025

undefined

Office, addressed to the All DDO and Directors of Distrcit Rural Development Agency (At Annexure-F)

(n) Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, be pleased to direct the respondents shall not terminate the services of any of the petitioner under the guise of their contractual employment getting over particular date, and be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to maintain status quo in on a so far as the employment of the petitioners is concerned;

(o) Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to comply with the statutory provisions of law more particularly with regard to service benefits such as pay fixation, increment, leave, maternity benefit, provident fund, pension and such other benefits;

(p) Ad interim relief in terms of paragraph (1), (m), (n) and

(o) be granted;

(q) To pass any other appropriate and just order/s;"

2. Heard Mr. Kuldeep Vaidya, learned advocate for the

petitioners, Mr. H.S. Munshaw, learned advocate for the

respondent No.7, Mr. D.G. Shukla, learned advocate for

the respondent No.10 and Ms. Manisha L. Shah, learned

AAG with Mr. Jay Trivedi, learned AGP for the

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/11995/2018 ORDER DATED: 25/07/2025

undefined

respondent - State.

3. It is pointed out that issue involved in the present

petition is now decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of this

Court passed in Special Civil Application 17474 of 2015

vide order dated 28.03.2027, relevant paragraphs of the

said order reads as under:

"52. For the foregoing reasons, the present group of petitions are partly allowed.

52.1 The prayer of the petitioners to regularise their contractual services and make them permanent on the establishment is rejected. Limited immunity that is made available to the petitioners is by allowing them to continue on their contractual employment and not to be replaced by other set of contractual employees on ad-hocism. The petitioners shall be continued in the existing cadre as long as the said Scheme continues, but purely on contractual basis and such employment shall be coterminus with the scheme, subject to evaluation of their performance, service and disciplinary rules as may be made applicable to them. The respondent-State shall insist on periodical upgradation of knowledge, improvisation of technical skill and overall preparedness on the subject, so also on computerisation.

52.2 The challenge to the Government Resolutions dated December 23, 2013 and August 28, 2014 and the consequential process of recruitment undertaken in the year

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/11995/2018 ORDER DATED: 25/07/2025

undefined

2014 pursuant to the public advertisement dated August 28, 2014, succeeds qua the petitioners only. Those petitioner who have qualified in the last examination of the year 2014 shall be continued on contractual employment without insistence on their fresh appointment by the respondent- State.

The respondent-authorities shall renew the petitioners' contract of service on the same terms and conditions as continued so far

52.3 Those petitioners who have cleared the examination and not qualified in the process of recruitment of the year 2014, shall not be discontinued, if already on contractual service pursuant to their selection through legally permissible mode in the years 2009 and 2011.

52.4 Those of the petitioners who have approached this Court after their termination on account of nonextension of their contractual employment, but otherwise given appointment after selection under the Rules/ on following public advertisement, shall be restored to continue on their original posts. This shall be considered as their contractual employment without any break.

52.5 It is being clarified that those appointments which have been made freshly pursuant to the aforementioned resolutions and process of selection under challenge in the year 2014, in no manner, shall be affected by this judgment.

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/11995/2018 ORDER DATED: 25/07/2025

undefined

52.6 It is being clarified that in absence of any policy of the State to grant permanency in any of the cadres at the District, Taluka or Gram Panchayat levels, the issue of the length of service of the petitioners deserves no adjudication. However, if any such policy in future is made by the State, the petitioners shall be at liberty to raise the contention of continuation and shall be entitled to raise the issue of the length of service from the date of their initial appointment. This Court has not concluded the said issue in the present group of petitions and has left the same for the petitioners to contend at an appropriate time in the future, if the occasion so arises.

52.7 As a parting note, it is being observed that this Court would fail in its duty if it does not act as a catalyst in the words of the Apex Court and draws the attention of the State Government that if may need to take a policy decision in respect of creating permanent establishment where contractual appointments have continued for more than a decade and its continuation is still felt by gearing up at all levels. Since it entails large financial implication, a marathon exercise is begging the attention of the State.

Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. There shall be, however, no order as to costs."

4. It is also pointed out that identical issue is also

decided by the Division Bench of this Court passed in

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/11995/2018 ORDER DATED: 25/07/2025

undefined

Letters Patent Appeal No.983 of 2017 vide order dated

24.04.2018, relevant paragraphs of the said judgment

read are paragraphs 5 to 9, which reads as under:

"5. As against, learned advocate appearing for the respondents would contend that all the above aspects are considered by learned Single Judge in a detailed CAV Common Judgement in the context of Act 2005, various executive instructions contained therein and the decisions of the Apex Court in the cases of State of Haryana and Ors. vs. Piara Singh and Ors., Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. vs. Umadevi and other such decisions by referring to 4 levels namely State, District, Taluka and Village containing various posts and the qualification of individual writ petitioners with their work experience has given limited relief which do not require any interference and appeal deserves to be dismissed.

6. Having heard learned Asst. Government Pleader for the appellant-State and learned advocate for the respondents for the sake of convenience, we reproduced herein above the directions contained in para 52 of the order impugned, which also formed part of our oral order dated 19.2.2018 passed in this appeal.

7. Since the prayer to regularise the contractual service of the writ petitioners and to make them permanent on the establishment is rejected by learned Single Judge, limited benefit made available to them was direction to the

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/11995/2018 ORDER DATED: 25/07/2025

undefined

authority to continue the contractual employment and that they are not to be replaced by other set of contractual employees on ad-hoc basis. Further while passing such order learned Single Judge has taken care of existing educational qualifications and work experience of each of the employees and readiness on their part to undergo any kind of training so as to improvisation of technical skill and overall preparedness on the subject, so also on computerisation.

8. The directions of above in nature issued by learned Single Judge in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are in consonance with law laid down by the Apex Court, to which, reference is made in the decisions and it is trite that nature of employment namely contractual on which employee is serving is not to be replaced by another set of employees with same terms and conditions.

9. Considering the object of the Act, 2005 namely to provide employment in rural area by the Central Government and substantial cost to be incurred for and administrative side namely payment of wages and salary is to be borne by the Central Government under Rule 22 and State Government is fastened with the liability with the cost of unemployed allowances payable under the scheme and only 1/4th of the material cost of the scheme including payment of wages to skilled and semi-skilled workers subject to provisions of Schedule II, we find no substance in the challenge to the order impugned passed by learned Single Judge in this appeal filed by the State of Gujarat

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/11995/2018 ORDER DATED: 25/07/2025

undefined

and in absence of merit it is dismissed."

5. Considering the submissions made at the bar, the

present petition is partly allowed.

6. The prayer of the petitioners to regularize their

contractual services and make them permanent on the

establishment is rejected. Limited immunity that is made

available to the petitioners is by allowing them to

continue on their contractual employment and not to be

replaced by other set of contractual employees on ad-

hocism. The petitioners shall be continued in the existing

cadre as long as the said Scheme continues, but purely

on contractual basis and such employment shall be

coterminous with the scheme, subject to evaluation of their performance, service and disciplinary rules as may