Gujarat High Court
Veraval-Patan Joint Municipal ... vs State Of Gujarat on 26 April, 2022
Author: Biren Vaishnav
Bench: Biren Vaishnav
C/SCA/9130/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/04/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9130 of 2019
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
================================================================
VERAVAL-PATAN JOINT MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES CREDIT CONSUMER
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
MR HARIBHAI J PATEL(9810) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR KURVEN DESAI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MR AMAR D MITHANI(484) for the Respondent(s) No. 4
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 3
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
Date : 26/04/2022
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. RULE returnable forthwith. Mr. Kurven Desai, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 as well as Mr. Amar D. Mithani, learned advocate waives service of notice of Rule for the concerned respondent No.4 - Nagarpalika.
Page 1 of 4 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 27 21:12:41 IST 2022 C/SCA/9130/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/04/2022
2. With the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing today.
3. By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, initially the petitioner has prayed for a direction that the respondent Nos.2 and 3 decide the proposal dated 25.9.2018 sent by the Veraval - Patan Joint Municipality and grant the benefits of the 7th pay commission to the petitioner. It appears that pursuant to the proposal initially sent by the Municipality, the Regional Commissioner of Municipality, Bhavnagar by an order dated 15.6.2019 rejected the proposal of the Municipality on the ground that the explanation given by the Municipality is not acceptable and for the Financial Years 2018-19, since the establishment expenditure is 63.08%, even though in the proposal the Municipality had stated that the expenditure for 2017-18 was 44.64% and Financial Year 2018-19, it was 47.36%, the proposal for giving the benefits of the 7th pay commission was rejected.
4. A Civil Application No.1 of 2019 was therefore moved by the petitioner seeking amendment in the petition and challenging the order of the Regional Commissioner of Municipality dated Page 2 of 4 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 27 21:12:41 IST 2022 C/SCA/9130/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/04/2022 15.6.2019.
5. Mr. Haribhai J. Patel, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the assessment of its expenditure at 63% by the impugned order is not in consonance with the decision of this Court in the case of S. A. Jafai and others v. State of Gujarat and others reported in 2011(2) GLR 1223. He would submit that for calculating the expenditure, parameters have been laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of S.A. Jafai (Supra) as to what expense has to be included for calculating the limit of 48%.
6. Considering the Judgment in the case of S.A. Jafai (Supra), what is relevant on reading paragraph Nos.18, 20, 25 and 27 is that while counting or calculating the expense at the ceiling of 48%, establishment expenses for engaging Daily Wagers and Fixed Pay employees need not be included.
7. It appears that when initially the proposal was sent by the Municipality, the same was not accepted by the Regional Commissioner of Municipality, Bhavnagar on the ground that the Municipality was undervaluing its expenses. Page 3 of 4 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 27 21:12:41 IST 2022 C/SCA/9130/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/04/2022
8. Considering the fact that as laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of S.A. Safai (Supra) only on the limited ground of re-assessment of the expenditure, the order of 15.6.2019 is quashed and set aside. A fresh proposal shall be sent by respondent No.4 to the respondent No.3 for the Financial Years 2017-18 and 2018-19 and the respondent No.3 - Regional Commissioner shall reconsider the proposal based on the guidelines of the decision in the case of S.A. Safai (Supra). Respondent No.4 shall send the proposal within four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment to the respondent No.3 and the respondent No.3, in turn, will send the proposal after calculation to respondent No.2 and the respondent No.2 shall decide the same in accordance with law within a period of ten weeks from the date of receipt of such proposal.
9. With the aforesaid observations, the petition is partly allowed.
Rule is made absolute to that extent. No order as to costs. Direct Services is permitted.
[ BIREN VAISHNAV, J. ] VATSAL S. KOTECHA Page 4 of 4 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 27 21:12:41 IST 2022