Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Jagdishsinh Mangusinh Chouhan vs State Of Gujarat on 17 January, 2022

Author: Biren Vaishnav

Bench: Biren Vaishnav

    C/SCA/11508/2020                                  ORDER DATED: 17/01/2022



           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

            R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11508 of 2020

==========================================================
                       JAGDISHSINH MANGUSINH CHOUHAN
                                    Versus
                              STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.KRISHNAN GHEVARIYA, ADVOCATE for MR                             MURALI          N
DEVNANI(1863) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
MR.KURVEN DESAI, AGP (1) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4
NOTICE SERVED(4) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,5,6
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV

                               Date : 17/01/2022

                                ORAL ORDER

1. Heard Mr.Krishnan Ghevariya learned advocate for Mr.Murli Devnani learned advocate for the petitioners, Mr.Kurven Desai learned AGP for respondent nos.1, 2 and 5 and Mr.H.S.Munshaw learned advocate appearing for respondent nos.3 and 4.

2. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for a relief that the benefits of 300 days' un-availed privileged leave in favour of the petitioner be released. Reliance is placed on several decisions of this Court which are Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 18 20:40:19 IST 2022 C/SCA/11508/2020 ORDER DATED: 17/01/2022 referred to extensively in this petition.

3. Mr.Munshaw learned counsel for the Panchayat has filed an affidavit-in-reply contending that the petitioners have already been granted the benefit of resolution of 17.10.1988 including retiral benefits and they are not entitled, benefits of leave encashment for a period of 300 days.

4. Considering the fact that the issue is covered by the decision of this Court in case of State of Gujarat v. Govindbhai Karshanbhai Parmar rendered in LPA No.236 of 2020 and another decision of this Court rendered in case of Maganbhai Nagarbhai Patel v. State of Gujarat rendered in Special Civil Application No.11631 of 2020, present petition is required to be allowed.

5. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to extend the benefits of 300 days privilege leave to the petitioners and also revised pensionary benefits including the terminal benefits in case of the petitioners and recompute the pension Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 18 20:40:19 IST 2022 C/SCA/11508/2020 ORDER DATED: 17/01/2022 and the pensionary benefits by counting the service of the petitioners from the initial date of appointment and the benefits that accrue to the petitioners in terms of privilege leave of 300 days and revised pensionary benefits together with the arrears shall be paid to the petitioners preferably within a period of 8 (eight) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

(BIREN VAISHNAV, J) ANKIT SHAH Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 18 20:40:19 IST 2022