Gujarat High Court High Court

Sumanben vs State on 2 August, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Sumanben vs State on 2 August, 2011
Author: H.K.Rathod,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/7099/2011	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7099 of 2011
 

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

 

SUMANBEN
NARENDRABHAI SOLANKI - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT THROUGH SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
PH PATHAK for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1, 
None
for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 02/08/2011 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

Heard
learned Advocate Mr. PH Pathak for petitioner and learned AGP Mr.
Maulik Nanavati for respondent State Authority.

Representation
made by petitioner in June, 2008 which is at page 26 annexure H has
remained undecided and not examined by respondents.

Petitioner
was working with respondents with effect from 3.2.1989 and service
of petitioner was terminated on 1st March, 1993. Said
order of termination was challenged by petitioner before labour
court in reference no. 156 of 92 and labour court has decided it on
26.9.1997 in favour of petitioner by granting reinstatement in
service with all consequential benefits. Said award was not
implemented by respondent authority. Therefore, special civil
application no. 8979 of 1999 was filed by petitioner before this
court and thereafter, petitioner was reinstated in service. On
9.7.2001, this court decided aforesaid petition in favour of
petitioner. Even though petitioner remained in service, was
receiving only monthly salary of Rs.1350.00 and her earlier service
has not been taken into account and her services have yet not been
regularized by respondents and therefore, aforesaid representation
is made by petitioner which has remained undecided and, therefore,
petitioner has filed this petition.

In
light of this back ground, it is directed to respondents to consider
representation made by petitioner and also to consider award passed
by labour court as well as decision of this court as referred to
above and also to consider recommendation made by Rector Government
Boys School, Rajpipla vide his letter dated 12.7.2007 and also to
consider case of other similarly situated employee Savitaben and
then to pass appropriate reasoned orders in accordance with award of
labour court as well as decision of this Court as referred to above,
within three months from date of receipt of copy of this order and
then to communicate decision to petitioner immediately thereafter.

With
these observations and directions, this petition is disposed of by
this court without expressing any opinion on merits. Direct Service
is permitted.

(H.K.

Rathod,J.)

Vyas

   

Top