Gujarat High Court

Milan K Chudasama vs State Of Gujarat on 1 October, 2025

                                                                                                                       NEUTRAL CITATION




                              C/SCA/8641/2017                                            ORDER DATED: 01/10/2025

                                                                                                                        undefined




                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                                       R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8641 of 2017

                       ==========================================================
                                                           MILAN K CHUDASAMA
                                                                  Versus
                                                         STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
                       ==========================================================
                       Appearance:
                       MS MAMTA R VYAS(994) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
                       MR PARTH PATEL, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 - State
                       RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4
                       ==========================================================

                          CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT

                                                              Date : 01/10/2025

                                                               ORAL ORDER

1. The present petition, under Article 226 of

Constitution of India, is preferred by the petitioner with the

following prayers.

"8(a) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside order dated 27.05.2016 passed by Respondent No.2 for declining the proposal of the petitioner for granting him the benefit of AGP of Rs.7000 with effect from 01.10.2010 and further be pleased to direct respondents to extent the benefit of AGP of Rs.7000 to the petitioner with effect from 01.10.2010 along with arrears with

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/8641/2017 ORDER DATED: 01/10/2025

undefined

interest from the date he became entitled to till the actual payment is made to the petitioner;

(b) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to direct the respondent authorities to extend the benefit of AGP of Rs.8000 to the petitioner with effect from 01.10.2015 and further be pleased to direct the respondents to pay the same to the petitioner with arrears and interest from the date he became entitled to till the actual payment is made to the petitioner;

(c) Pending admission and final disposal of this petition the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the order dated 27 th May 2016 passed by Respondent No.2 and further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to extent the benefit of AGP of Rs.7000 with effect from 01.10.2010 and AGP of Rs.8000 with effect from 01.10.2015 to pay salary accordingly to the petitioner;

(d) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/8641/2017 ORDER DATED: 01/10/2025

undefined

grant any other relief or pass any other order which the Hon'ble Court may consider as just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;

(e) costs of the petition be provided for from the respondents jointly and severally;"

2. Heard learned advocates.

3.1 Learned advocate Ms. Vyas for the petitioner has

submitted that after following the due process, the petitioner

was appointed as Lecturer in Shantilal Shah Engineering

College, Bhavnagar i.e Respondent No.4 on 24.09.2004. The

petitioner is possessing the qualification of B.E. (Civil) with

First Class degree. As per the Rules, those who are possessing the B.E. degree are entitled for the senior scale

after six years and if the employee concerned is possessing

master's degree, then he/she would be entitled for senior

scale on competition of five years.

3.2 She has further submitted that since the petitioner

was appointed on 01.10.2004, he is entitled for senior scale

on 01.10.2010 i.e. after competition of six years. Accordingly,

he made an application for senior scale which was forwarded

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/8641/2017 ORDER DATED: 01/10/2025

undefined

to the higher authority.

3.3 She has also submitted that as per the circular of

the Government, the procedure for giving benefit of senior

scale was stopped for the time being.

3.4 She has further submitted that after obtaining the

permission from the Government, the petitioner has enrolled

himself for pursuing M.E. degree at Respondent No.4 College

in the year 2009. While pursuing the M.E. degree course, the

petitioner was transferred to Respondent No.3 Government

Engineering College, Bhuj in August-2010. Due to some

clashes, the Principal of the College made adverse remarks in

the ACR of the petitioner for the period from 14.09.2010 to

31.03.2011. After making the adverse remarks, the Principal retired on 27.06.2011. But due to the adverse remarks, the

petitioner is not given senior scale which was due on

01.10.2010. The petitioner made representation to the

Principal on 05.07.2011. The same was further submitted to

the Joint Director of Education, who, by order dated

08.12.2011, rejected the appeal preferred by the petitioner.

3.5 The ACR of the petitioner from the date of

appointment till 13.09.2010 was up to the mark, but because

of the aforesaid adverse ACR for the period for 14.09.2010 to

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/8641/2017 ORDER DATED: 01/10/2025

undefined

31.03.2011, he is not given the senior scale and thereby

having the huge financial loss. A reliance is place on the

judgment of this Hon'ble Court recorded on Special Civil

Application No.8054 of 2020, which was confirmed in Letters

Patent Appeal No.318 of 2022 and pointed out that the ACR

is adverse only for 26 days for the period upto 01.10.2010.

Even for the other benefits also, the ACR is adverse for only

six months. Therefore, on the basis of aforesaid judgment, the

petitioner is entitled for the first senior scale and requested

for the consequential benefits. It is also requested that on

the basis of this, he is also entitled for the second senior

scale w.e.f. 01.10.2015, with arrears and all consequential

benefits. She has submitted that this petition may be

allowed.

4. The learned AGP Mr.Patel for the State has

vehemently opposed this petition. He has drawn the attention

of this Court towards the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of

Respondent No.1 and has submitted that since the remarks

in the ACR were adverse for the period of 14.09.2010 to

31.03.2011, the petitioner lacks eligibility criteria and

therefore, he is not entitled for the senior scale from

01.10.2010. He has submitted that this petition may be

dismissed.

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/8641/2017 ORDER DATED: 01/10/2025

undefined

5. In response to this, learned advocate Ms.Vyas for

the petitioner has relied on the rejoinder and reiterated the

averments made in the rejoinder. It is submitted that this

petition may be allowed.

6.1 I have heard rival submissions made by the

learned advocates for the respective parties. I have perused

the material on record. From the record, this Court finds

that the only ground for denying the senior scale to the

petitioner is adverse ACR for period from 14.09.2010 to

31.03.2011. The petitioner was appointed vide order dated

24.09.2004 and joined the duty on 01.10.2004. He is entitled

for the senior scale after competition of five years on

01.10.2010. However, due to adverse remarks, he is denied

the senior scale.

6.2 Looking to the period of adverse remarks and

considering the judgment recorded on Special Civil Application

No.8054 of 2020 and Letters Patent Appeal No.318 of 2022,

the issue is already decided. The period of adverse remarks

is only for six months. When the petitioner was entitled on

01.10.2010, the adverse ACR was only for 14.09.2010 to

31.09.2010, which is hardly of sixteen days. Even for the

further higher scale, his ACR is adverse only for the period

from 01.10.2010 to 31.03.2011, which is only for six months.

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/8641/2017 ORDER DATED: 01/10/2025

undefined

6.3 At this stage, it would be fruitful to refer to the

relevant Para : 7 of the judgment recorded on Special Civil

Application No.8054 of 2020, which is as under.

nd "The respondents are directed to give 2

higher pay scale from 27.04.2011 or for such extended a period of time taking into consideration the extended period, for which, he had received adverse remarks in giving effect to the higher pay scale on a subsequent date, five months from the date of 27.04.2011.

Terminal benefits be revised accordingly. Rule is made absolute accordingly."

6.4 In view of above, denying the petitioner for the

senior scale is erroneous. Further, the petitioner is entitled

for the benefit of AGP of Rs.7000 w.e.f. 01.04.2011 and

further senior scale of AGP Rs.8000 w.e.f. 01.04.2016.

7. Having regard to peculiar facts and circumstances

in the case and considering the decision of this Court noted

above, this petition needs to be allowed and is allowed

accordingly. The impugned order dated 27.05.2016 passed by

Respondent No.2 denying AGP of Rs.7000 w.e.f. 01.10.2010

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/8641/2017 ORDER DATED: 01/10/2025