Gujarat High Court
Indravadan Rasiklal Gandhi vs State Of Gujarat & 2....Opponent(S) on 24 April, 2017
Author: Vipul M. Pancholi
Bench: Vipul M. Pancholi
C/MCA/81/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CLARIFICATION) NO. 81 of 2017
In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7315 of 2005
==========================================================
INDRAVADAN RASIKLAL GANDHI....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 2....Opponent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ASIM J PANDYA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
ADVANCE COPY SERVED TO GP/PP for the Opponent(s) No. 1
MR HS MUNSHAW, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 2 - 3
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI
Date : 24/04/2017
ORAL ORDER
1. This application is filed for clarification/deletion of the word `notional' in para 20 of the order dated 1.3.2016 passed in Special Civil Application No.7315 of 2005.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Asim Pandya for the applicant and learned advocate Mr.Munshaw for the respondent nos.2 and 3.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Pandya has restricted his submission for grant of benefit of higher grade scale on completion of nine years Page 1 of 4 HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Mon Aug 14 04:40:41 IST 2017 C/MCA/81/2017 ORDER from 1.12.1989, the date on which the juniors to the petitioners were promoted on the post of senior salesman. It is submitted that though this Court has specifically directed the respondents to grant all consequential benefits, the respondents have not granted higher grade scale on completion of nine years of service i.e. from 1998. It is submitted that the respondents have wrongly interpreted the word `notional' mentioned in paragraph 20 of the order dated 1.3.2016. Learned advocate has therefore requested to clarify the said aspect.
4. On the other hand, learned advocate Mr.Munshaw appearing for the respondent nos.2 and 3 has submitted that if the applicant is aggrieved by any of the directions issued by this Court in the said order, the applicant can challenge the same by filing appeal before higher forum. Learned advocate Mr.Munshaw has thereafter submitted that this Court has intentionally used the word `notional' benefit in the aforesaid order and therefore if the applicant is claiming any benefit with regard to higher grade scale, he may file necessary representation before the respondent authorities. As and when such representation is made, the same would be considered in accordance with law. He, therefore, requested that this application be dismissed.
Page 2 of 4HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Mon Aug 14 04:40:41 IST 2017 C/MCA/81/2017 ORDER
5. I have considered the submissions canvassed on behalf of learned advocates appearing for the parties. This Court, in the order dated 1.3.2016, has observed in paragraph 20 as under:
"20. The petition is allowed. The respondent Corporation is hereby directed to consider the case of the petitioner for deemed date promotion from 01.12.1989, the date on which juniors to the petitioner were promoted on the post of Senior Salesman and thereafter the respondent Corporation shall give all consequential notional benefits to the petitioner. The aforesaid exercise shall be carried out within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Rule is made absolute. No order as to cost."
6. Thus, the direction was issued to the respondent-Corporation to consider the case of the petitioner for deemed date promotion from 1.12.1989, the date on which juniors to the petitioners were promoted on the post of senior salesman. The direction was also given to give all the consequential benefits to the petitioner. The word `notional' is used in the aforesaid paragraph of the order. However, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, it is clarified that the petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of higher grade scale on completion of nine years of service from the deemed date of Page 3 of 4 HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Mon Aug 14 04:40:41 IST 2017 C/MCA/81/2017 ORDER promotion-1.12.1989. In other words, from 1.12.1998, the applicant is entitled to get higher grade scale as per the Government Resolution. The applicant is also entitled to get difference of salary from 1.12.1998 on the basis of higher grade scale. The rest of the operative order dated 1.3.2016 is not disturbed except the aforesaid clarification.
7. With this clarification and observation, this application is partly allowed. Direct service is permitted.
(VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.) Srilatha Page 4 of 4 HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Mon Aug 14 04:40:41 IST 2017