Girdharbhai Muljibhai Eradiya vs The State Of Gujarat
2025 Latest Caselaw 824 Guj

Gujarat High Court

Girdharbhai Muljibhai Eradiya vs The State Of Gujarat on 11 July, 2025

Author: Nikhil S. Kariel

Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel

                                                                                                               NEUTRAL CITATION




                              C/SCA/21659/2023                                  ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025

                                                                                                                undefined




                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                                        R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 21659 of 2023

                        ========================================================
                                                    GIRDHARBHAI MULJIBHAI ERADIYA
                                                                 Versus
                                                      THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
                        ========================================================
                        Appearance:
                        MR CHINTAN N DESAI(9940) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
                        MS TANUSHREE SHRIMAL ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
                        Respondent(s) No. 1
                        MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
                        ========================================================

                             CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL

                                                            Date : 11/07/2025

                                                            ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Chintan Desai for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Tanushree Shrimal for the respondent-State.

2. Issue Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

3. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought for the following prayers :

(A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to respondents, directing the respondents to grant the benefits of the Government resolution dated 17.10.1988 to the petitioner;

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/21659/2023 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025

undefined

(B) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to respondents, commanding the respondents to calculate the days of service put in by the petitioners in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Workmen of American Express International Banking Corporation Versus Management of American Express International Banking Corporation reported in 1985 4 SCC 71 and to revise the benefits of the petitioners in view of Government resolution dated 17.10.1988 along-with arrears at 12% rate of interest per annum;

(C) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to respondents, commanding the respondents to consider the service of the petitioner in view of ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Division Bench Hon'ble Division Bench in case of Executive Engineer Versus Samudabhai Bhedi reported in 2017 4 GLR 2952.

(D) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to respondents, commanding the respondents to grant higher pay scale to the petitioners upon completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service.

(E) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to respondents, commanding the respondents to extend the benefits of the 7th Pay Commission which being implemented w.e.f 01.01.2016 by the Government of Gujarat and all other consequential benefits flowing thereof along- with the arrears in view of Revision of Pay Rules, 2016 and as is being granted by the Road and Building Department

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/21659/2023 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025

undefined

and other departments by Government Resolution dated 16.05.2017 with 12% rate of interest per annum;

(F) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass such other and further order which deems to fit, just and proper in the interest of justice.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that he had joined service with the respondent No.3 as Chowkidar from the year 1989 on daily wages and since the services of the petitioner had been terminated on 29.06.1999, the petitioner had been constrained to approach the learned Labour Court by preferring Reference (LCH) No. 239 of 2000 and whereas vide award dated 30.09.2013, the learned Labour Court had directed reinstatement without back-wages, more particularly with continuity of service. It appears that the petitioner had been reinstated in the year 01.09.2015 and had continued as such till date.

5. It appears that in the interregnum, the award passed by the learned Labour Court had been assailed by the respondent-State by preferring Special Civil Application No. 18319 of 2013 and whereas a learned Co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 24.06.2014 had confirmed the award insofar it awarded reinstatement with continuity of service without back-wages and whereas the petition preferred by the State challenging the order of reinstatement had been dismissed.

6. Considering such a position, it would appear that the learned Labour Court had inferred in favour of the petitioner as regards the petitioner having worked for more than 240 days every year from the year 1989 till the date of termination i.e. 29.06.1999. It would also appear that the period

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/21659/2023 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025

undefined

from the date of termination till the date of award was covered by the grant of continuity by the learned Labour Court albeit without back-wages which part of the order finally came to be confirmed by the learned Co-ordinate Bench vide decision dated 24.06.2014 as referred to hereinabove. Insofar as the period after the date of award is concerned, while the learned Labour Court passed the award on 30.09.2013, yet, the petitioner was reinstated only in the month of September, 2015 inspite of there being no interim relief against the order of reinstatement, therefore the period from the date of the award till the date of reinstatement is required to be treated as period in duty. Thus, the respondents are required to calculate the entitlement of the petitioner on basis of the above, more particularly entitlement for grant of benefit under the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 and whereas all available benefits as per the entitlement would also be required to be paid to the petitioner within a specific period of time.

7. Having regard to the above, the following directions are passed :

(i) Based upon the observations as above, the period from entry in service i.e. 01.06.1989 till the date of termination i.e. 29.06.1999 shall be treated as period in duty where the petitioner had completed 240 days per year.

(ii) From 30.06.1999 till 30.09.2013, the said period though will be treated as period in service, the benefits as the petitioner would be entitled to would be calculated notionally.

(iii) The period from the date of the award till the date of

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/21659/2023 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025

undefined

retirement except for the period when petitioner actually worked shall be treated as the petitioner having actually worked and the difference of salary from the date of award till the date the petitioner was reinstated would have to be paid to the petitioner along with treating the petitioner as being in employment as a regular employee.

(iv) The respondent No.3, in consultation with the respondent No.1, shall calculate the entitlement of the petitioner on the basis of the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 including all retiral benefits as well as pensionary benefits and appropriate benefits thereupon shall be paid to the petitioner.

(v) The entire exercise shall be done by the respondents within a period of ten weeks from the date of receipt of this order. In case the disbursement is not done within the period of ten weeks, then the petitioner would be entitled to interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of order.

(vi) The period between the date of award till the date of actual reinstatement shall be treated as period in service and the arrears shall be paid to the petitioner upon verification, if not paid.

8. With the above observations and directions, the present petition stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J) NIRU