Gujarat High CourtDilipsinh vs Principle on 9 April, 2009Author:M.R.ShahBench:M.R. ShahSCA/816120/2008	 3/ 5	JUDGMENT 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8161 of 2008
 

 
For
Approval and Signature:  
 
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
 
=========================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

1
		
		 
			 

Whether
			Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

2
		
		 
			 

To
			be referred to the Reporter or not ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

3
		
		 
			 

Whether
			their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

4
		
		 
			 

Whether
			this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
			interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
			made thereunder ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

5
		
		 
			 

Whether
			it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
		
	

 

=========================================


 

DILIPSINH
JASVANTSINH BHATTI & 2 - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

PRINCIPLE
DISTRICT JUDGE SABARKANTHA & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
JAYESH A KOTECHA for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 3.MR RT
SONGARA for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 3. 
MR JB PARDIWALA for
Respondent(s) : 1, 
MR. JK SHAH, AGP for Respondent(s) : 2, 
RULE
SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) :
3, 
=========================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
		
	

 

Date
: 09/04/2009 

 

 
ORAL
JUDGMENTBy
	way of this petition underArticle 226of the Constitution of India,
	the respective petitioners who are at present serving with the
	District Court, Sabarkantha at Himatnagar have prayed for an
	appropriate writ, direction and order directing the respondents to
	grant the benefits of first higher grade scale to them as per the
	Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994.That
	the petitioner No.1 was appointed as Assistant in the Court of
	learned Civil Judge, Mehsana on 11.2.1998. That, thereafter the
	petitioner prayed for voluntary transfer to Sabarkantha District and
	petitioner was transferred to Court of learned Principal Civil
	Judge, Modasa on 1.1.2002.Petitioner
	No.2 was appointed as Assistant in the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad
	on 15.1.1998n and that thereafter he has requested for voluntary
	transfer and his request was considered and he was transferred to
	Court of learned Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Idar, District
	Sabarkantha from 1.7.1999.Petitioner
	No.3 was appointed as Peon in the Court of learned Civil Judge,
	Patan on 22.3.1993 and thereafter he has requested for voluntary
	transfer and he was transferred to the Court of learned Civil Judge
	(J.D.), Modasa District Sabarkantha w.e.f. 2.12.1996.It
	is the case on behalf of the respective petitioners that on
	completion of 9 years of service all the petitioners were entitled
	to get the benefit of first higher grade scale as per the Government
	Resolution dated 16.8.1994. They requested/applied for extending the
	benefit of higher grade scale and it is the case on behalf of the
	respective petitioners that in fact, respondent No.1 Principal
	District Judge, Sabarkantha at Himatnagar vide orders dated
	23.01.2008; 1.12.2007 and 1.12.2007 respectively passed an order
	sanctioning /extending the benefit of first higher grade scale from
	the date they completed 9 years of service. That office of the
	respondent No. 3 raised an objection vide impugned communications
	dated 25.3.2008;26.3.2008 and 24.3.2008 (Annexure B Colly) denying
	the first higher grade pay scale to the respective petitioners from
	the day they completed 9 years of service from their initial
	appointment by submitting that the earlier service /seniority prior
	to their request transfer is not required to be counted for the
	purpose of granting benefit of first higher grade pay scale and that
	the cases of respective petitioners are required to be considered as
	per the Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994. Being aggrieved and
	dissatisfied with the aforesaid decision in not extending the
	benefit of first higher grade scale to the respective petitioners on
	completion of 9 years of service from initial appointment (prior to
	their request transfer), the petitioners have preferred the present
	Special Civil Application underArticle 226of the Constitution of
	India.The
	controversy raised in the petition is squarely covered by the
	following decisions of the Division Bench as well learned Single
	Judge of this Court as well as recent decision of the Hon'ble
	Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Uttam
	Vishun Power reported in 2008 AIR SCW 937.1)Unreported
	decision of the learned Single Judge dated 24.07.2001 in Special
	Civil Application No.8076 of 1995 in the case of Jayesh Balashanker
	Dave v/s. State of Gujarat confirmed by the Division Bench in
	Letters Patent Appeal No.187 of 2003 and further confirmed by the
	Hon'ble Supreme Court as the Special Leave Petitions against the
	said decision has been dismissed.Unreported
	decision of the Division Bench dated 05.05.2003 in Letter Patent
	Appeal No.229 of 2003 and other cognate appeals in the case of
	Paragbhai Bhagwandas Patel and Ors. V/s. State of Gujarat and Ors.Unreported
	decision of the Division Bench dated 20.12.2003 in Letter Patent
	Appeal No.761 of 2003 in Special Civil Application No.10469 of 1999
	in the case of State of Gujarat and Ors. V/s. Mulchandbhai Lavjibhai
	Patel and Ors.Ajitsinh
	Chaturji Rathod v/s. State of Gujarat reported in 2004 (4) GLR 3181.State
	v/s. Muchandbhai L Patel reported in 2004 (1) GLR 536
	  


	Unreported
	decision of the learned Single Judge dated  dated 12.02.2008 in
	Special Civil Application No.12721 of 2007 and Anr. Confirmed by the
	Division Bench dated 06.10.2008 in Letter Patent Appeal No.789 of
	2008 and other cognate appeals in the case of District Development
	Officer and Anr. V/s. Devenkumar Rameshchandra Yagnik.5.
	Even recently this Court considering all the above judgments vide
	judgment and order dated 12.3.2009 in Special Civil Application No.
	1446 of 1994 and other allied matters has held that all the
	petitioners who were transferred on request transfer are entitled to
	get benefit of higher grade scale considering 9 years counting their
	seniority from the date of their initial appointment i.e. (period
	prior to their request transfer also) and has directed the concerned
	respondent to grant the benefit of higher grade scale accordingly.6.
	In view of the above and for the
	reasons stated in the judgment and order of this Court dated
	12.3.2009 rendered in Special Civil Application No. 1446 of 1994 and
	other allied matters present petition deserves to be allowed and it
	is held that respective petitioners are entitled to benefit of
	higher grade scale from the date of their regular appointment on the
	sanctioned post with respective Districts i.e. Mehsana District,
	Small Cause Court, Ahmedabad, Patan District, (past service with
	respective District Court prior to their request transfer also).7.
	For the reasons stated above, petition succeeds. It
	is held that all the petitioners are entitled to get benefit of
	higher grade pay scale considering/ counting 9 years from the date
	of their initial regular appointment with respective District Court 
	i.e. (period prior to their request transfer also) and accordingly
	concerned respondents are directed to grant benefit of higher grade
	pay scale to the respective petitioners in accordance with law and
	scheme considering their total seniority from their initial regular
	appointment i.e. counting seniority/period prior to their request
	transfer also. Rule is made absolute accordingly. In the facts and
	circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to costs.(M.R.SHAH,J.)
	
	

 
	 


	kaushik