Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
LPA/762/2008 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 762 of 2008
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11067 of 2003
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI
Sd/-
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH
Sd/-
=========================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
No
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ? No
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
No
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 ? No
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? No
=========================================
STATE
OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS
Versus
BR
SOLANKI AND OTHERS
=========================================Appearance
:
MR NJ SHAH,
ASSTT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
the Appellants
MR BS BRAHMBHATT for the
Respondents
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH
Date
: 27/04/2011
ORAL
JUDGMENT
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI)
1. We have
heard learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. N.J. Shah for the
appellants. Though the board has been revised, learned counsel for
the respondents Mr. B.S. Brahmbhatt is not present either in the
first call or in the second call.
2. This
intra court Letters Patent Appeal has been filed challenging
judgment and order dated 19.11.2007 passed by learned Single Judge in
Special Civil Application No.11067 of 2003. While allowing the writ
petition, in para 12, the following directions were issued by the
Court.
“12. In
view of the aforesaid, this petition deserves to be allowed with
following directions.
The
respondents are hereby directed to consider the petitioners’ case
either for upgradation to the post of Driver or consider them for
according benefits of higher grade pay scale admissible to the
post of Driver in accordance with the provisions of Government
Resolution dated 16.8.1994. The respondents are at liberty to
either upgrade the post of Peon-cum-Driver in case of the
petitioners to that of Driver or accord the petitioners the
benefit of higher grade pay scale in accordance with Government
Resolution dated 16.8.1994. The entire exercise of considering and
according appropriate pay scale and paying arrears to be completed
within three months from the date of receipt of the order.”
3. Learned
Assistant Government Pleader has urged that two directions were
issued by the learned Single Judge and the benefit of higher grade
pay scale admissible to the respondents has been granted pursuant to
Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994 after completion of 9 years of
service. Therefore, out of two directions given by the Court, one has
been complied. The Court has clearly stated that either the post has
to be upgraded or benefit of higher pay scale in pursuance of
Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994 has to be granted. The
appellants were required to comply one of the aforesaid two
directions. Since the appellants have complied the direction for
giving higher pay scale after completion of 9 years service in
pursuance of Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994, misapprehension
of the appellants that they have also to comply with the direction of
up-gradation to the post of Driver is misconceived.
4. In the
result, the Appeal is devoid of any merit and is accordingly
dismissed. Interim relief,if any, stands vacated.
Sd/-
(V.M.
SAHAI, J.)
Sd/-
(G.B.
SHAH, J.)
omkar
Top