Gujarat High Court High Court

Botad vs Bhimjibhai on 17 February, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Botad vs Bhimjibhai on 17 February, 2011
Author: K.M.Thaker,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/13959/2010	 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 13959 of
2010 
 
=================================================
 

BOTAD
MUNICIPALITY THROUGH CHIEF OFFICER - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

BHIMJIBHAI
RAMJIBHAI DHANDHAL - Respondent(s)
 

=================================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
PREMAL R JOSHI for Petitioner(s) : 1, 
RULE SERVED for
Respondent(s) : 1, 
MR DG SHUKLA for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=================================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 17/02/2011  
ORAL ORDER

Heard
Ms. Joshi, learned advocate for the petitioner. She has submitted
that the substantive post of the respondent is that of a Wireman and
whenever the respondent is required to work as a Light Inspector,
extra allowance is being paid to him. She also submitted that having
regard to the said fact and material available on record, which is
related to the said issue, the Court has, by order dated 21.10.2010,
admitted the petition and also granted ad-interim relief.

2. Mr.

Shukla, learned advocate for the respondent, has opposed the
ad-interim relief and submitted that after adjudication, the Court
has directed the petitioner to pay the difference of wages and that
therefore, stay of the said direction ought not be granted.

3. Ms.

Joshi has referred to the document at Annexure-D and submitted that
two posts are different and so far as the post of Light Inspector is
concerned, there is only one sanctioned post whereas the respondent
is engaged as Wireman and that therefore, the impugned award has been
passed without having regard to the material on record. Mr. Shukla,
learned advocate has opposed this submission.

4. In
this view of the matter, the ad-interim relief granted earlier will
continue to operate until final hearing and disposal of the writ
petition. The registry is directed to list the matter in the cause
list of Final Hearing.

[K.M.Thaker,
J.]

kdc

   

Top