SCA/757620/2006 3/ 3 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7576 of 2006 To SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7602 of 2006 ========================================================= A.B.PATEL - Petitioner(s) Versus THE STATE OF GUJRAT & 3 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MS MAMTA R VYAS for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR JK SHAH IN SCA NOS.7576/06 to 7586/06, MS KRINA CALLA IN SCA NOS. 7587/06 to 7592/06, MR SHIVANG SHUKLA IN SCA NOS.7593/06 to 7597/06 and MR HH PARIKH IN SCA NOS.7598/06 to 7602/06 - AGPs for Respondent(s) : 1, None for Respondent(s) : 2 - 4. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 15/10/2008 ORAL ORDER
1. By
way of these petitions, the petitioners have prayed to direct the
respondent authorities to approve the regular pay-scale of
Rs.4500-125-7000 to the petitioners from the date of completion of
two years of their service, i.e. from 13.12.2003 and to pass
appropriate orders for the payment of arrears from that date along
with interest.
2. The
facts in brief are that the petitioners herein were selected as
Kaushalya Sahayaks in 2001 and were appointed as such on
a fixed pay of Rs.4500/- per month. The said appointments were also
approved by the respondent authorities.
3. It
is the case of the petitioners that as per the G.R. dated 06.06.2000,
an employee is entitled for the regular pay-scale of Rs.4500-125-7000
on completion of two years of satisfactory service. On the basis of
the said G.R., the respondent Institution had also forwarded a
letter to the respondent authorities requesting to place the
petitioners in the said regular pay-scale. However, no action was
taken by the respondent authorities in that regard.
4. Again,
in the year 2005, the petitioners had made an application, through
respondent no. 4 Institution, requesting the respondent
authorities to place them in the regular pay-scale. However, till
today, there is no response from the respondent authorities on
the said application of the petitioners. Hence, they have preferred
these petitions before this Court.
5. Ms.
Mamta Vyas, learned Advocate for the petitioners, has stated that the
petitioners have already made a representation in the year 2005 to
the respondent no. 2 herein, through the respondent no. 4
Institution and that the same has not been decided so far. She has,
therefore, requested that necessary directions may be issued to the
respondent authority concerned to decide the said application of
the petitioners at the earliest.
6. Heard
learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents
on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I
find the request made by the learned Advocate for the petitioners to
be reasonable. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the
merits of the matter, the respondent no. 2 authority is directed
to decide the application made by the petitioners in the year 2005 in
the subject matter involved in these petitions, after hearing the
petitioner and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law within a
reasonable period and communicate the same to the petitioners. It is
clarified that this order has been passed on the peculiar facts and
circumstances of the case and the respondent no. 2 authority
shall pass necessary orders without being influenced by any
observations made by this Court in this matter. With the above
direction, the petitions stand disposed of. Direct service permitted.
[K.
S. JHAVERI, J.]
Pravin/*