Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/2256/2011 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2256 of
2011
=========================================================
KESHAVLAL
H JOSHI - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT THROUGH SECRETARY & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR.
SANJAY SUTHAR FOR MR. NK MAJMUDAR
for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR. L.B. DABHI, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HON'BLE
SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
Date
: 25/02/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. This
petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been
filed with the following prayers:-
“A) admit
this petition;
B) issue
appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the concerned
respondent authorities for extending the benefit of sr. scale of
Rs.3000-5000 to the petitioner w.e.f. 1.1.1996 i.e. the date on which
the petitioner had completed 8 years service as Lecturer and also for
extending the benefit of corresponding revised pay-scale of
Rs.10000-15200 w.e.f. 1.1.1996 i.e. the date on which the 5th
Pay Commission came into force together with all consequential
benefits flowing therefrom an appropriate directions be issued upon
the concerned respondent authorities to fix the pension of the
petitioner accordingly in the aforesaid peculiar facts and
circumstances of the case.
C) pending
admission and final disposal of the present petition, be pleased to
issue appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the concerned
respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for
extending the benefit of sr.scale of Rs.3000-5000 to the petitioner’s
husband w.e.f. 1.1.1996 i.e. the date on which the petitioner had
completed 8 years service as Lecturer and also for extending the
benefit of corresponding revised pay-scale of Rs.10000-15200 w.e.f.
1.1.1996 i.e. the date on which the 5th Pay Commission
came into force together with all consequential benefits flowing
therefrom and appropriate directions be issued upon the concerned
respondent authorities to fix the pension of the petitioner
accordingly till the aforesaid petition is finally heard and decided.
D) pass
such orders as thought fit in the interest of justice.”
2. At
the very outset, Mr. Sanjay Suthar, learned advocate for Mr. N.K.
Majmudar, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the interest
of justice would be met, if the petitioner is permitted to make a
representation to respondent No.2, within a period of two weeks from
today, directing the said respondent to consider and decide the same,
expeditiously.
3. Upon
the above statement being made by the learned advocate for the
petitioner, the following order is passed:-
(a) The
petitioner is permitted to make a representation to respondent No.2,
within a period of two weeks from today.
(b) If
the said representation is made within the stipulated period of time,
respondent No.2 shall consider and decide the same, within a period
of three months from the date of receipt thereof, in accordance with
law.
It
is clarified that while passing this order, the Court has not entered
into the merits of the case.
4. The
petition is disposed of, in the above terms.
(Smt.
Abhilasha Kumari, J.)
Safir*
Top