Gujarat High Court
Jani Gnaaneshchandra Narendrakumar vs State Of Gujarat on 3 July, 2025
Author: Nikhil S. Kariel
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2429/2022 ORDER DATED: 03/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2429 of 2022
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 1 of 2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2429 of 2022
==========================================================
JANI GNAANESHCHANDRA NARENDRAKUMAR & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR JA ADESHRA(107) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,10,11,12,13,14,15,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
MR ADITYA PATHAK AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 03/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1 of 2025:
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. J.A. Adeshra for the applicants, who by
way of Civil Application, is contending a very unique proposition inasmuch
as that while the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.6191
of 2003 and allied cases, had decided on number of issues and since the
Hon'ble Division Bench, while hearing a challenge against the said decision,
had confined their observations as regards a single issue, therefore, the
decision of the learned Coordinate Bench would be treated to be in force as
far as the other issues decided. The uniqueness of the proposition being
canvassed being that the learned advocate conveniently ignore the fact that
the Letters Patent Appeal had been allowed and the decision of the learned
Coordinate Bench had been set aside. Thus, in other words, what is sought
to be contended is that even though a judgment is set aside by a superior
Court, yet it will continue to hold the field in so far as issues which were not
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2429/2022 ORDER DATED: 03/07/2025
undefined
specifically addressed by the superior Court.
2. To elaborate, the Division Bench vide judgment dated 27.11.2024 has
inter alia at para 8 observed "The sole issue involved in the present appeal is
that whether the respondents, who were appointed as "Computer
Programmers" in the respective Colleges affiliated to Gujarat University can
be extended the same pay scale to that of the "Lecturers" or not, on the
basis of the principle of equal pay for equal work". Learned advocate would
submit that this was the sole issue, which was considered by the Division
Bench, therefore, the findings of the learned Coordinate Bench in Special
Civil Application No. 6191 of 2003 vide judgment dated 06.10.2021 would
still remain in force.
3. On the other hand, the Division Bench at para 20 has observed as
thus:
"20. Thus, on an overall appreciation of the facts and settled law on the doctrine
of 'equal pay for equal work', the respondents who are appointed as Computer
Programmers are not entitled to the pay scale of Lecturers. Hence, the present
appeal merits acceptance. The same is allowed. The impugned judgement and order
passed by the learned Single Judge is quashed and set aside. As a sequel, the
connected civil application stands disposed of."
4. The above para clearly reveals that the judgment and order passed by
the learned Coordinate Bench had been set aside by the Division Bench.
Thus in the eyes of law, there is no judgment dated 06.10.2021 passed by the
learned Coordinate Bench in Special Civil Application No.6191 of 2003 and
allied matters, yet very strangely it is attempt to be argued that for all other
purposes except what had been discussed by the Division Bench at para 8
quoted hereinabove, the judgment of the learned Single Judge was hold the
field. Such contention of the learned advocate being absolutely
misconceived, cannot be countenanced at all.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2429/2022 ORDER DATED: 03/07/2025
undefined
5. Having regard to the above, the present Civil Application is disposed
of as rejected.
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2429 of 2022:
6. In this main matter, the prayers sought for being as such:
"(A)This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction
by holding that the petitioners are covered by the judgment and order dated
06.10.2021 passed by this Hon'ble Court in SCA No.6191 of 2003 at
Annexure-A and further be pleased to hold that the post of the petitioners
is a 'teaching post' and they are entitled to the pay scale of lecturer in
Computer Science with effect from 1.1.1996 and further be pleased to
order / direct the respondents to calculate the amount of arrears payable to
the petitioners for such higher revised pay scale and pay the said amount of
arrears to the petitioners within a period of 12 weeks from the date of
order.
(B) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, this
Hon'ble Court be pleased to order / direct the respondents to abide by the
judgment & order dtd. 6.10.2021 passed by this Hon'ble Court in SCA
No.6191 of 2003 at Annexure-A qua the petitioners and further be
pleased to order / direct the respondents to treat the petitioners as a
teaching staff and restrain the respondents from retiring the petitioners on
attaining age of 58 years and pay to the petitioners the pay scale of lecturer
in Compute Science."
7. It appears that order dated 06.10.2021 passed by the learned
Coordinate Bench of this Court in Special Civil Application No.6191 of
2003 is set aside by the Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent
Appeal No.65 of 2022 vide judgment dated 27.11.2024. The substratum of
the petition i.e. to declare the petitioners as similarly situated to the
petitioners of Special Civil Application No.6191 of 2003, now no more in
existence as the judgment in the said petition is set aside, the present
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2429/2022 ORDER DATED: 03/07/2025
undefined
petition is disposed of as rejected. Rule is discharged.
8. Needless to clarify that, in case, order of the Division Bench is
interfered with by the Hon'ble the Supreme Court, then it would be for the
petitioners to make appropriate application for revival.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
Y.N. VYAS
