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

Vinodbhai Govindji Joshi vs State Of Gujarat on 19 January, 2022

Author: Biren Vaishnav

Bench: Biren Vaishnav

     C/SCA/12064/2021                             JUDGMENT DATED: 19/01/2022




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12064 of 2021


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 ?

==========================================================
                        VINODBHAI GOVINDJI JOSHI
                                 Versus
                           STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. MITAL C VISANI(9896) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS SURABHI BHATI, ASST GOVERNMENT PLEADER/PP(99) for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED BY DS(5) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV

                              Date : 19/01/2022

                             ORAL JUDGMENT

1. RULE. Ms. Surabhi Bhati, learned AGP waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent State.

2. Heard Ms. Mital Vasani, learned advocate for the petitioner, Ms. Page 1 of 2 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 20 21:27:03 IST 2022 C/SCA/12064/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/01/2022 Surabhi Bhati, learned AGP for respondents.

3. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for a relief that the benefits of 300 days' unavailed leave encashment in favour of the petitioner be released.

4. Reliance is placed on several decisions of this Court which are referred to extensively in this petition. Ms. Bhati, learned AGP submitted that the petitioners has already been granted the benefit of resolution of 17.10.1988 including retiral benefits and he is not entitled, benefits of leave encashment for a period of 300 days.

5. 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.

6. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to extend the benefits of 300 days leave encashment to the petitioner and also revised pensionary benefits including the terminal benefits in case of the petitioner and recompute the pension and the pensionary benefits by counting the service of the petitioners from the initial date of appointment. The benefits that accrue to the petitioner in terms of leave encashment 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. Rule is made absolute accordingly.

(BIREN VAISHNAV, J) DIVYA Page 2 of 2 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 20 21:27:03 IST 2022