[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Taiyyabhusen Anvarali Saiyad vs State Of Gujarat on 6 April, 2026
Author: Nirzar S. Desai
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13414/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13414 of 2023
==========================================================
TAIYYABHUSEN ANVARALI SAIYAD
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR M T SAIYAD(3848) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR AAKASH GUPTA AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 06/04/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr.M T Saiyad for the petitioner
and learned AGP Mr.Aakash Gupta for the Respondents.
2. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for
following relief;
(A) Be pleased to allow this Spl. Civil Application;
(B) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or certiorari
or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing
the respondent authorities to grant the last increment for
the period of 01/07/2012 to 30/06/2013 to the petitioner
and consequentially direct the respondent authorities to
revise the pension and other retirement benefits of the
petitioner and make the payment of arrears with interest
as may be deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court;
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13414/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/04/2026
undefined
(C) Pending admission and final disposal of the petition
this Hon'ble court may be pleased to direct the
respondent authorities to consider the representation of
the petitioner dated 13/09/2021 taking into consideration
the judgments and orders of this Hon'ble High Court;
(Annex.-C),
(D) Pass such other and further relief(s) as the Hon'ble
Court deems fit and proper.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that he joined the services
of the respondents in the year 1978 and retired as Secretary,
Gujarat State Haj Committee on 30th June 2013. After
rendering 34 years of service, he retired; however, as he
retired on 30th June 2013, he was not granted the benefit of
one increment which would have fallen due on 1st July 2013.
4. Considering the prayers made, as well as the fact that
the issue regarding grant of one increment to employees
retiring on 30th June of every year has been considered by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India & Others vs. M.
Siddaraj in Miscellaneous Application Diary No. 2400 of 2024
in Civil Appeal No. 3933 of 2023 , wherein the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, by order dated 20th February 2025, passed the
following order:
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13414/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/04/2026
undefined
"Miscellaneous Application Diary Nos. 2400/2024,
35783/2024, 35785/2024 and 35786/2024
Delay condoned.
We had passed the following interim order dated
06.09.2024, the operative portion of which reads as
under:
"(a) The judgment dated 11.04.2023 will be given
effect to in case of third parties from the date of the
judgment, that is, the pension by taking into
account one increment will be payable on and after
01.05.2023. Enhanced pension for the period prior to
31.04.2023 will not be paid.
(b) For persons who have filed writ petitions and
succeeded, the directions given in the said judgment
will operate as res judicata, and accordingly, an
enhanced pension by taking one increment would
have to be paid.
(c) The direction in (b) will not apply, where the
judgment has not attained finality, and cases where
an appeal has been preferred, or if filed, is
entertained by the appellate court.
(d) In case any retired employee has filed any
application for intervention/impleadment in Civil
Appeal No. 3933/2023 or any other writ petition and
a beneficial order has been passed, the enhanced
pension by including one increment will be payable
from the month in which the application for
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13414/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/04/2026
undefined
intervention/ impleadment was filed."
We are inclined to dispose of the present
miscellaneous applications directing that Clauses (a), (b)
and (c) of the order dated 06.09.2024 will be treated as
final directions. We are, however, of the opinion that
Clause (d) of the order dated 06.09.2024 requires
modification which shall now read as under:
"(d) In case any retired employee filed an
application for intervention/impleadment/writ
petition/original application before the Central
Administrative Tribunal/High Courts/this Court, the
enhanced pension by including one increment will
be payable for the period of three years prior to the
month in which the application for intervention/
impleadment/ writ petition/ original application was
filed."
Further, clause (d) will not apply to the retired
government employee who filed a writ petition/original
application or an application for intervention before the
Central Administrative Tribunal/High Courts/this Court
after the judgment in "Union of India & Anr. v. M.
Siddaraj"1, as in such cases, clause (a) will apply.
Recording the aforesaid, the miscellaneous
applications are disposed of.
We, further, clarify that in case any excess payment
has already been made, including arrears, such amount
paid will not be recovered.
It will be open to any person aggrieved by non-
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13414/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/04/2026
undefined
compliance with the directions and the clarification of
this Court, in the present order, to approach the
concerned authorities in the first instance and, if
required, the Administrative Tribunal or High Court, as
per law.
Pending applications including all
intervention/impleadment applications shall stand disposed
of in terms of this order.
Contempt Petition (Civil) Diary Nos. 38437/2023,
38438/2023, 11336/2024 and 20636/2024
In view of the order passed today in the connected
matters, that is, M.A. Diary No. 2400 OF 2024 and other
connected applications, the present contempt petitions
will be treated as disposed of with liberty to the
petitioners to take recourse to appropriate remedies, if
required and necessary, as indicated supra. It goes
without saying that the respondents shall examine the
cases of the petitioners/ applicants in terms of the order
passed today and comply with the same expeditiously.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed
of."
5. According to learned advocate Mr. Saiyad, the petitioner's
case would fall under Category D stated in the first paragraph
of the above-referred decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
Learned AGP Mr. Aakash Gupta could not dispute the aforesaid
fact.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13414/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/04/2026
undefined
6. Accordingly, the State is directed to consider the case of
the present petitioner in light of the aforesaid decision of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in M. Siddaraj (supra) and to extend
the benefits, as per the entitlement of the petitioner, within a
period of three months from the date of receipt of this order.
7. With the above direction, the petition stands disposed of.
Notice is discharged. No order as to costs.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
BHAVIN MEHTA
