Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/8778/2011 4/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8778 of 2011
=========================================================
M
H ROKAD & 31 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT THRO' SECRETARY & 5 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
NK MAJMUDAR for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 32.
MR AL SHARMA AGP for Respondent(s) :
1,
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
6.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date
: 15/07/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. Heard
learned advocate Mr.N.K.Majmudar for petitioners and learned AGP
Mr.A.L.Sharma for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3.
2. This
petition is preferred by 32 female health workers, those who are
appointed by District Panchayat, Rajkot and at present, all
petitioners are serving as female health workers under District
Panchayat, Rajkot having fulfilled eligibility and qualification
criteria which have been in force at the time of initial appointment
on the post of female health workers. These all 32 female health
workers are working for more than 15 to 16 years with District
Panchayat, Rajkot. As per GR dated 25.2.2009 (Annexure-C, Page-48) in
respect to these 32 and other female health workers, in all comes to
53, their services have been regularized and they are now not
required to clear direct recruitment procedure. Accordingly, these
petitioners are considered to be a regular employees of District
Panchayat, Rajkot. A specific resolution has been passed in favour of
46 female health workers and out of that, 32 female health workers –
present petitioners are mentioned at Page-51 and 52.
3. Learned
advocate Mr.Majmudar submitted that District Panchayat, Rajkot has
issued a circular dated 7.6.2010 giving advertisement for direct
recruitment in the post of female health workers. In that, it has
been specifically made clear by District Health Officer, District
Panchayat, Rajkot that present petitioners, those who were appointed
on ad-hoc basis in the year 1995-96, they should not have to require
to clear this direct recruitment procedure and they were granted
exemption. However, the grievance of present petitioners is that in
pursuance to their services have been regularized, their service
books are not prepared accordingly and not only that, they are not
even given increments as well as higher grade as per GR dated
16.8.1994.
3.1 Learned
advocate Mr.Majmudar also submitted that merely order of regularizing
services of petitioners has been passed means decision has been
taken, even though consequential benefits have not been extended in
their favour and that is why, present petition is filed.
4. In
light of these facts, this petition is directly preferred before this
Court without approaching to respondents in respect grievance voiced
in present petition. Therefore, let petitioners may approach by way
of detailed representation to respondents claiming all the benefits
which are available to regular employee of District Panchayat
including pay fixation, increments, higher pay-scale and also to
prepare service book accordingly, within a period of one month from
date of receiving copy of present order.
5. As
and when respondents receive such representation from petitioners, it
is directed to respondents to consider the GR dated 25.2.2009
(Annexure-C, Page-48) and also to consider another resolution from
District Panchayat, Rajkot dated 7.6.2010 where petitioners have been
exempted from process of direct recruitment in the post of female
health workers and thereafter, to consider that once their services
have been regularized by respondents, then naturally all
consequential benefits they are entitled as a matter of right from
date of joining in service and also entitled to consequential
benefits.
6. Let
that aspect may be considered positively and sympathetically and
then, to pass appropriate reasoned order in light of aforesaid
resolution which has been referred by this Court, within a period of
three months from date of receiving such representation from
petitioners and communicate decision to petitioners immediately.
7. In
view of above observations and directions, present petition is
disposed of by this Court without expressing any opinion on merits.
8. It
is made clear by this Court that in case if decision is taken by
respondents in favour of petitioners, let that benefit may be
immediately extended in favour of pets.
9. However,
in case if ultimate decision is adverse to petitioners, it is open
for petitioners to challenge the same before appropriate forum in
accordance with law. Direct service is permitted.
[
H.K.RATHOD, J. ]
(vipul)
Top