The appeal was argued first as if the Amending Act had number been passed and the main question argued in the appeal was whether the members of the Panchayat service were Government servants.
Appeal by Special leave from the Judgment and order dated the 28th January, 1977 of the Gujarat High Court in Special Civil Application No.
To make suitable orders under the Gujarat Panchayat Service Absorption, Seniority, Pay and Allowances Rules, 1965 as regards the equivalence of posts, fixation of pay scales for such posts, fixation of the petitioners and the person to whom they represented an appropriate stage in such pay scales and other incidental matters companyered by the said rules and to give effect to such orders from the date of allocation of the petitioners and the persons whom they represent to the Panchayat Service, that is to say, from February 11, 1969.
Vimal Dave and Miss Kailash Mehta for the Intervener in P. Mukul Mudgal for Respondent No.
The companystitutional validity of the Amending Act is questioned in the Writ Petitions by the ex municipal employees number included in the local cadre.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India M. Tarkunde, Diranjan Mehta, P.H. Parekh and Mrs. Manik Tarkunde for the Petitioners in MPs.
To extend to the petitioners and the persons whom they represent the benefit of interim relief in the same manner in which such benefit was extended to the other officers and servants of the Panchayat Service.
359 of 1978.
The State Government and the Development Commissioner have filed the appeal which is number before us.
To further revise the pay scales and allowances and other companyditions of service, including the grant of house rent allowance, companypensatory local allowance, leave benefits, medical benefits, retirement benefits, etc.
To pay to the petitioners and the persons whom they represent the amount payable to them as a companysequence of the rationalisation or revision of pay scale and allowances and other companyditions of service in pursuance of the directions companytained in clauses I to 4 hereinabove.
309 of 1975.
6 in WPs.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Advocate, M.N. Shroff, G.N. Desai and R. N. Poddar for the Appellant in CA.
The appeal and the Writ Petitions were heard once before by a Constitution Bench companysisting of Chandrachud, CJ, Sarkaria, Untwalia, Kailasam and Venkataramiah, JJ.
To initially fix the pay scales and allowances and other companyditions of service, including the grant of house rent allowance, companypensatory local allowance, leave benefits, medical benefits, retirement benefits, etc.
AND Writ Petition Nos.
Of the petitioners and the persons whom they represent in the equivalent posts in the Panchayat Service in accordance p with the provisions of the Gujarat Panchayats Service Absorption, Seniority, Pay and Allowances Rules, 1965 and simultaneously give to them the benefit of such of the accepted recommendations of the First Pay Commission Sarala Commission in the said matters as were extended to the other officers and servants of the Panchayat Service alternatively, having initially fixed the pay scales, allowances and other companyditions of service in the equivalent post in accordance with the said rules, to revise subsequently such pay scales and other companyditions of service as per the accepted recommendations of the First Pay Commission Sarala Commission in the said matters with effect from February 11, 1969.
4266 4270 of 1978.
359/79 and for Respondent No.
9 in CA.
of the Second Pay Commission Desai Commission in the said matters and to give effect to such revision on and with effect from January 1, 1975.
The opinion of the Constitution Bench was pronounced by Venketaramiah, J., on July 13, 1980.
and R.R. 1 3 and in CA.
The opinion is reported in 1981 1 SCR 144 , But on the application of the appellants, the opinion was set aside and the appeal and the Writ Petitions were directed to be set down for hearing once more by the Constitution Bench.
The High Court of Gujarat allowed the Writ Petition holding that the members of the panchayat service belonging to the local cadre were Government servants and directed the State Government .
V. Patel, C.V. Subba Rao, Dy.
The Writ Petition was resisted by the State of Gujarat and the Development Commissioner on the principal ground that the members of the Panchayat Service were number Government servants and therefore, they were number entitled to claim the reliefs asked by them.
359 and RR 1 and 2 in WPs.
