Gujarat High Court High Court

==========================================Appearance vs None For on 15 September, 2008

Gujarat High Court
==========================================Appearance vs None For on 15 September, 2008
Author: Bhagwati Prasad,&Nbsp;Honourable D.H.Waghela,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

LPA/965/2008	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 965 of 2008
 

In


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4470 of 2008
 

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

JAYSUKHVAN
CHAKUVAN GOSAI 

 

Versus
 

DISTRICT
DEVELOPMENT OFFICER AND OTHERS 

 

==========================================Appearance
: 
MR SATYEN B
RAWAL for the Appellant 
None for Respondent(s)
: 1 - 3, 5, 
MR KP RAWAL, ASSTT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent
No.4  
==========================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 15/09/2008 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA)

1. Invoking
Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the appellant has called into
question the order of learned Single Judge rejecting the petition
mainly on the ground of res judicata and his claim having been found
to have no basis. It could not be gainsaid that the petitioner had
approached this Court by way of an earlier petition and his claim
of pension was rejected at the outset while the petition was admitted
for his claim of revision of pay scale. Thereafter, by an order of
the Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No.1460 of 2005, the
petitioner was permitted to withdraw the appeal and make a
representation so as to raise his grievances before the appropriate
authority, which had to consider the claims of the petitioner on the
basis of the prevailing legal provisions.

2. It
was also found by learned Single Judge and reiterated in the order
dated 15.12.2007 of the District Development Officer that the
petitioner was not regularly appointed in accordance with the
provisions of the Gujarat Panchayat Act, 1963 and he came to be
regularised in service by virtue of the consent award based on the
settlement filed before the Labour Court.

3. Learned
counsel for the appellant was at a loss to explain as to how and on
what legal basis, the claim of the petitioner for revision of pay
scale or pension was justified. In such circumstances, earlier
rejection of the claim of pension on merits after reference to the
provisions of the Gujarat Panchayat Act, did operate as res
judicata and further claim of revision of pay scales also having
been found to be baseless, the petition could not be entertained for
grant of any relief. In such circumstances, the impugned order being
wholly legal and justified, the appeal is dismissed in limine.

(BHAGWATI
PRASAD, J.)

(D.H.WAGHELA,
J.)

omkar

   

Top