Gujarat High Court
Ranjitsinh Ziubha Sarvaiya vs Shaileshkumar Gokulbhai Patel ... on 21 July, 2020
Author: N.V.Anjaria
Bench: Sonia Gokani, N.V.Anjaria
C/MCA/1046/2018 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1046 of 2018
==========================================================
RANJITSINH ZIUBHA SARVAIYA & 2 other(s)
Versus
SHAILESHKUMAR GOKULBHAI PATEL EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS SEJAL K MANDAVIA(436) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR.NIKUNJ KANARA, AGP(4) for the Opponent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
Date : 21/07/2020
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA) Heard learned advocate Mr. SejalMandavia for the applicant and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Nikunj Kanara for the respondent State.
2. This contempt application was directed against the order dated 28.6.2018 passed in Special Civil Application No.2496 of 2017.
3. The said order in its relevant part reads as under:
" Heard learned advocate Ms.SejalMandavia for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Vishrut Jani for the respondent - State.
2. It is the grievance of the petitioners that they have put in number of years in service, however the length of their services has not been counted for the purpose of granting benefit under Resolution dated 17th October, 1988.Page 1 of 4 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 22 23:05:32 IST 2020 C/MCA/1046/2018 ORDER
3. As it transpires from the earlier orders dated 15th February, 2017 and 27th April, 2018 passed by this Court, decisions of this Court in Special Civil Application No.810 of 2014 decided on 16th March, 2015 as well as in Special Civil Application No.2931 of 2017 decided on 04th May, 2017, squarely supports the case of the petitioners which were the petitions filed by the similarly situated employees.
4. In view of this uncontroverted aspect, Rule, returnable on 27th September, 2018. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Vishrut Jani waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent - State.
5. By way of interim relief it is directed that the petitioners shall be given the necessary benefits on the basis of the aforesaid decisions in Special Civil Application No.810 of 2014 as well as in Special Civil Application No.2931 of 2017 and the benefits shall be released in favour of the petitioners. As far as petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are concerned who are retired, they shall be paid pension by extending benefits of the Resolution."
3.1 It was stated that the aforementioned order was tested in Letters Patent Appeal No.1423 of 2019 and stood confirmed. It transpires from the record that in the present proceedings, order was passed by the Division Bench (Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. R .Bhrambhatt & Hon'ble Mr. Justice A. P. Thakar) on 17.1.2020, whereby the statement of learned Assistant Government Pleader was recorded that the admissible amount payable pursuant to the order dated 28.6.2018 is quantified to the tune of Rs.23.88 Lakhs, in respect of the three applicants and that the same would be deposited in the Registry of the Court. The Division Bench directed the depositing of the said amount within ten days.
Page 2 of 4 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 22 23:05:32 IST 2020 C/MCA/1046/2018 ORDER4. It was stated today that pursuant to the above direction by order dated 17.1.2020, the amount of Rs.23.88 Lakhs has been deposited by the respondent concerned and the same is lying with the Registry of this Court.
5. As the amount is deposited which becomes due and payable to the applicants pursuant to the aforementioned order dated 28.6.2018, the element of commission of contempt of the said direction can be said to have been vanished.
5.1 There is no gainsaying that the order dated 28.6.2018 is an interim order and the main Special Civil Application No.2496 of 2018 is still pending to be considered on its final merits. Since the order complained of in the present contempt petition is interim in nature, we are of the view that the purpose would be served if the amount of Rs.23.88 Lakhs deposited with the Registry as above is invested in the Fixed Deposit by the Registry till the final outcome in the main proceedings of the Special Civil Application is obtained. At the same time, it would be permissible for the applicant petitioner to request to get the final hearing of the Special Civil Application concluded expeditiously.
6. In view of the above, we dispose of the present application by directing the Registry to invest the aforementioned amount of Rs.23.88 Lakhs in the Fixed Deposit with a nationalized bank initially for a period of one year and renewal. Interest which may accrue on the said deposit shall accumulate to be subject to further and final orders which may be passed by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition.
6.1 As observed herein above, the applicant petitioner shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application in the Registry for fixing the early date of final hearing of the Special Civil Application No.2496 of 2017. If such an application is made, we Page 3 of 4 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 22 23:05:32 IST 2020 C/MCA/1046/2018 ORDER are sure that due regard shall be given thereto.
7. The present application is disposed of as per above observations and directions.
(SONIA GOKANI, J) (N.V.ANJARIA, J) MISHRA AMIT V./ Manshi Page 4 of 4 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 22 23:05:32 IST 2020