Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/4612/2010 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4612 of 2010
=========================================================
BIRUSINH
R SHEKHAVAT & 1 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MS
ABHA B MAKWANA for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2.
MR JK SHAH AGP for Respondent(s) : 1,
None
for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 22/04/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Draft
amendment granted.
1. By
way of this petition, the petitioners have prayed to direct the
respondent-authorities to grant them the benefits of higher grade
from the date when it became due with consequential effect and
interest @ 12% p.a. till its realization and further to direct the
respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for promotion to
the next post with consequential effect and benefits accruing
thereon.
2. The
facts in brief are that the petitioners were appointed as Hawaldar
Instructors in the respondent-Organization in the year 1992. On
24.09.1999 the petitioners made a representation to the respondents
requesting to promote them to the higher post on the ground that they
had rendered long years of service on the present post. However, vide
communication dated 12.11.2009, the petitioners were informed that
their request could not be granted and that they are eligible for the
pay-scale of Rs.4500-7000 only. Being aggrieved by the same, the
present petition has been preferred.
3. Heard
learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the documents on
record. For granting the benefits of higher pay-scale, the petitioner
had made the application dated 24.09.1999 to the
respondent-authority. Thus, for the reliefs which might have become
due in the year 1999, the petitioners have preferred the present
petition. In other words, for claiming the reliefs which might have
become due in the year 1999, a petition has been filed only in April
2010, i.e. after a period of almost 11 years.
4. Looking
to the facts of the case, it would be pertinent to refer to a
decision of the Apex Court in the case of Shiv
Dass v. Union of India & Ors., AIR 2007 SC 1330,
wherein, it has been held that if petition is filed beyond reasonable
period, say three years, normally, the Court would reject the same or
restrict the relief.
5. In
the present case, as stated herein above, the petition came to be
filed after a considerable delay of almost 11 years and no
explanation has come from the petitioner as regards the said delay.
Thus, in view of the principle laid down in Shiv Dass’s case (supra),
this petition does not deserve to be entertained.
6. Consequently,
the petition is rejected.
[K.S.JHAVERI,
J.]
Pravin/*
Top