Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat Through Secretary vs J.J.Pandya on 18 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2861/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2861 of 2019
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS.
Versus
J.J.PANDYA & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS POOJA ASHAR, AGP for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MS VYOMA K JHAVERI(6386) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE NOT RECD BACK for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 18/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. This petition is filed for the following prayers:
"13(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS MAY BE PLEASED TO admit
and allow this Special Civil Application.
(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS MAY BE PLEASED TO quash and
set aside the Judgment and Award dated 24.7.2018 passed
by the Ld.Tribunal in Appeal No.71 of 2016.
(C) Pending admission and final hearing of the Petition,
YOUR LORDSHIPS MAY BE PLEASED TO stay,
implementation, operation and execution of the Judgment and
Award 24.7.2018 passed by the Ld.Tribunal in Appeal No.71
of 2016.
(D) xxxx"
2. This petition is filed by the State challenging the
judgment and award dated 24.7.2018 passed by the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2861/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2025
undefined
Ld.Gujarat Civil Services Tribunal in Appeal No.71 of 2016
hereby the learned Tribunal has granted the higher pay scale
to respondent no.1 herein with effect from 30.9.1990 instead
of 13.3.2003 and further has also granted deemed promotion
from 13.11.2003 to respondent no.1 herein.
3. Heard learned AGP Ms.Ashar for the petitioners
and learned advocate Ms.Jhaveri for the respondent no.1.
4. Learned AGP has submitted that the crux of
controversy in the present petition is that the respondent
no.1 herein had cleared the departmental examination for the
promotional post of Senior Clerk on 13.11.2003 and was
accorded the benefits of first higher pay scale from the said
date as per provision 3(5) and 3(9) of the Government
Resolution dated 16.8.1994. However, the learned Tribunal
has granted the benefit of the first higher pay scale from
30.9.1990 i.e. the date when the respondent no.1 had
notionally completed 9 years of service and therefore this
petition is filed. She submitted that as the respondent no.1
had cleared his first departmental promotion examination only
on 13.11.2003 and therefore the learned Tribunal has erred
in granting the higher pay scale from 30.9.1990 instead of
13.11.2003. She, therefore, submitted that this petition be
allowed.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2861/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2025
undefined
5. Per contra, learned advocate for respondent no.1 has
submitted that the respondent was appointed on contractual
basis on 26.11.1979 and was discontinued vide order dated
29.11.1981; that the respondent was reinstated vide order
dated 9.9.1993 passed by the learned Labour Court in
Reference (LCR) No.855 of 1989; the said order was modified
by this Court vide order dated 6.2.1995; the the respondent
cleared the departmental examination in the yer 2003; that
the respondent is not aware about the conduct of examination
between year 1995 to 2003; that vide office order dated
25.2.2009, the services of the respondent no.1 were considered
as continuity of service from 29.11.1981 to 19.9.1995; that the
petitioner has retired on 30.6.2017; that the learned Tribunal
has not committed any error in passing the impugned order.
Hence, this petition be dismissed.
6. I have considered the rival submissions of the
parties and also perused the material on record. It transpires
from the record that the respondent had challenged the
decision of the petitioner of granting the first higher pay
scale from 13.7.2003 instead of 30.9.1990. The learned
Tribunal has considered the rival submissions and position of
law and has observed that the present respondent no.1 was
not in service on 30.9.1981 but he was reinstated on
21.9.1995 and therefore it is obvious that the respondent no.1
did not get any opportunity to clear the departmental
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2861/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2025
undefined
examination and that as the respondent no.1 passed the
departmental examination in the year 2003 and therefore he
cannot claim promotion as it is compulsory to pass the
departmental examination for promotion; but the respondent
no.1 is entitled for the higher grade pay scale from 30.9.1990
on completion of nine years as he was reinstated in service
and was treated as continuous service. Even on going
through the Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994 which is
relied on by learned AGP for the petitioner, it transpires
that the passing of departmental examination is required for
actual promotion and not for higher grade pay scale.
Therefore, when the respondent no.1 has completed the
requisite service as he was reinstated in service and is
having the continuous service, this Court does not find any
infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned
Tribunal.
7. Considering the over all facts and circumstances of
the present case, this petition is deserves to be dismissed.
Accordingly, dismissed. Notice/Rule is discharged. As there is
no interim relief granted in this petition, it is deemed that
the amount which is required to be paid as per the
impugned order of the Tribunal is paid. If not paid, the
same be paid within a period of six weeks from the receipt
of this order.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J)
SRILATHA
