Gujarat High Court
Pwd And Forest Employees Union vs State Of Gujarat on 29 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17531 of 2015
==========================================================
PWD AND FOREST EMPLOYEES UNION & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. SHALIN MEHTA WITH MS. ADITI S RAOL(8128) for the Petitioner(s)
No. 1
MS VIDHI J BHATT (6155) for the Petitioner(s) No. 2
DR. POOJA ASHAR, AGP for the Respondents - STATE
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s) No. 2
RULE NOT RECD BACK for the Respondent(s) No. 1,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 29/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present petition is filed by the petitioners for
seeking the following reliefs:
"A. Your Lordships be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari
or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring
the impugned letter dated 20.2.2015 from the respondent
no. 4 denying the petitioner no. 2 the benefits as contained
in Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 as per the
decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated
9.7.2013 as arbitrary, unreasonable, irrational, bad in law
and thus violative of Articles 14, 16, 21 and 23 of the
Constitution of India and quashing and setting aside the
same;
B. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of
mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to extend
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
to the petitioner no. 2 the benefits as contained in
Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988, as per the decision
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 9.7.2013 (reported in
2013 (8) Scale 579) to the petitioner no. 2 from the date
he became eligible for such benefits with all the
consequential benefits, including arrears of pay and
allowances;
C. Your Lordships be pleased to permanently restrain the
respondents herein from terminating or discontinuing the
services of the petitioner no. 2 other wise than in
accordance with law;
D. Pending admission and final hearing of the present
petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the
respondent authorities to process the case of the petitioner
no. 2 for grant of the benefits as contained in Government
Resolution dated 17.10.1988;
E. Pending admission and final hearing of the present
petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to restrain the
respondent authorities from taking any coercive action
against or terminating the services of the petitioner no. 2
otherwise than in accordance with law; and
F. Your Lordships may be pleased to pass any other and/or
further order, as deemed it, in the interest of justice."
2. Brief facts as stated in the memo of the petition are as
under:
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
2.1 It is the case of the petitioners in this petition that the
petitioner no. 2 is a daily-wager working in the Forests and
Environment Department of the State since last several
years. He has, by now, put in more than 5 years of service
as a daily-wager. It is further the case of the petitioners in
this petition that despite serving since last several years, the
petitioner no. 2 is getting only the minimum wages as per
the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. Earlier, he was being paid
bonus on a notional wage. At present, even the bonus is not
paid to him. Barring the minimum wages, no other benefits
or perquisites in the nature of allowances, etc. are extended
to the petitioner no. 2. In other words, the petitioner no. 2
herein is not even given a regular pay scale even after so
many years of service. On reaching the age of
superannuation, the petitioner no. 2 would not be entitled to
pension, provident fund and gratuity. Any kind of leave, be it
casual leave, earned leave or medical leave, is not admissible
to the petitioner no. 2 and he is not even given the benefit
of public holidays. It is further the case of the petitioners in
this petition that for the daily-wagers of the Narmada Water
Resources, Water Supply and Kalpasar Department and of
the Roads and Buildings Department, who are otherwise
equal to the daily-wagers in the Forests and Environment
Department in all respects, there is a scheme in place for
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
according quasi permanent status to them. The scheme was
launched by Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 issued
by the Roads & Buildings Department. It is important to
note that though the Forests and Environment Department
finds mention in the preamble of the said Government
Resolution dated 17.10.1988, it is not made applicable to the
daily-wagers of the Forests and Environment Department.
Thus, the said Government Resolution is selectively applied to
the daily-wagers of the Narmada Water Resources, Water
Supply and Kalpasar Department and of the Roads and
Buildings Department, though the preamble of the said
Government Resolution clearly seeks to confer benefits upon
the daily-wagers of the other departments mentioned therein
which include the Forests and Environment Department
where the petitioner no. 2 is engaged. It is further the case
of the petitioners in this petition that after hearing the
parties in Civil Appeals no. 5321-5322 of 2013 arising out of
Special Leave Petitions (C) no. 13619-13620 of 2012, the
Hon'ble Apex Court, vide its judgment dated 09.07.2013
directed the State (appellant therein) to grant the benefits of
the scheme as contained in Government Resolution dated
17.10.1988 to all the daily-wage workers of the Forests and
Environment Department working for more than five years. It
is further the case of the petitioners in this petition that
pursuant to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
Government of Gujarat in Forests and Environment
Department issued Government Resolution dated 15.9.2014
extending the benefits of Government Resolution dated
17.10.1988 to the daily-wagers working in the Forests and
Environment Department.
3.2 It is further the case of the petitioners in this petition
that on 15.1.2015, the petitioner no. 1 on behalf of the
petitioner no. 2 wrote to the respondent no. 4 requesting him
to extend the benefits of Government Resolution dated
17.10.1988 to the petitioner no. 2. On 20.2.2015, the
respondent no. 4 rejected the request of the petitioner no. 2
on the ground that from November, 2009 to October, 2012,
the petitioner no. 2 was working as a daily-wager but from
1.11.2012 to 31.1.2015, he has been working as a piece rate
employee and therefore, the Government Resolution dated
15.9.2014 is not applicable to him. It is further the case of
the petitioners in this petition that the petitioner no. 2 is
thus denied the benefits as contained in Government
Resolution dated 17.10.1988 on the specious plea that he is
not qualified for such benefits in terms of Government
Resolution dated 15.9.2014 as he is piece rate worker. It is
further the case of the petitioners in this petition that the
petitioner no. 2, since inception, has been working as a daily-
wager wireman and his service conditions have never been
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
changed. Assuming for the sake of argument that his service
conditions came to be changed from 1.11.2012, then, the same
are changed unilaterally by the respondent no. 4 without
informing the petitioner no. 2. Hence, the present petition
has been preferred.
3. Heard Mr. Shalin Mehta, learned senior advocates with
Ms. Aditi Raol, learned advocate with Ms. Vidhi Bhatt,
learned advocate for the respective petitioners and Dr. Pooja
Ashar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the
respondent-State.
4. Mr. Shalin Mehta, learned senior advocates with Ms.
Aditi Raol, learned advocate with Ms. Vidhi Bhatt, learned
advocate for the respective petitioners has contended that
benefit of Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 is required
to be given to the present petitioners as the petitioners have
worked continuously for more than five years. For that, the
attention of this Court is drawn towards the communication
dated 20.02.2015 made by the Principal, Gujarat Forest
Rangers College, Rajpipla to the President of PWD,
Employees Association and also the details given with the
affidavit-in-rejoinder where attendance of the petitioner for
the period from 01.09.2009 to 01.02.2015 was mentioned by
giving the days of service. He has submitted that in view of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
this, appropriate direction may be given to the respondent-
authority to give the benefit of G.R. dated 01.10.1988 or
subsequent G.R. of the Government, in appropriate manner
and consider the case of the petitioners accordingly.
5. Per contra, Dr. Pooja Ashar, learned Assistant
Government Pleader for the respondent - State has objected
the aforesaid submissions, more particularly, the details
produced in affidavit-in-rejoinder in tabular form by showing
the concern that there is no mentioning that which authority
has issued this documents and who has signed this document
and authenticity of such document is also required to be
verified. Considering the averments made in affidavit-in-reply
as well as considering the contention raised by the
respondent-State, she has submitted that without verification,
no benefit can be granted, more particularly, the entire
record, which is required to be verified by the authority and
then only, the prayers as prayed in the present petition, can
be granted.
6.1 Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances
of the case, and considering the submissions made by the
respective parties at the bar, I am of the opinion that
interest of justice would be survived if the respondent-
authority will look into the entire service record of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17531/2015 ORDER DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
present petitioners available with the respondent-authority
and after verifying the necessary details, if it is found that
the petitioners are entitled to get the benefit of Government
Resolution dated 01.10.1988, then the case of the petitioner
shall be considered accordingly and thereafter, by giving
necessary benefits accordingly. If it is not found then the
authority may take appropriate decision in accordance with
law. Such exercise shall be carried out by the respondent-
authority within eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy
of this order.
6.2 This Court deems it fit that abovementioned direction
will serve the purpose of the petitioners appropriately.
Therefore, the present petition is disposed of accordingly. It is
expected that the Authority shall take the decision in
accordance with law after verifying the record of service of
the petitioners available with the Authority and take decision
in accordance with law.
6.3 Since the abovementioned order is passed considering
the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court
has also not expressed any opinion on the merits regarding
the contention raised by respective parties.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J)
DIWAKAR SHUKLA
