RAMANBHAI RANCHHODBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioners is that they were initially appointed as daily wagers, the details of which have been enlisted by the petitioners at annexure-'A' to the petition together with their dates of retirement.

(2.) Mr.Krishnan Ghevariya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, has drawn my attention to the pension payment orders issued in the case of each of the respective petitioners and submitted that the initial period of service of the petitioners to their date of regularization has not been counted as service for the purposes of pension.

(3.) Prima facie, perusal of the pension orders indicate that the services rendered by the petitioners prior to their date of regularization appears to have been missed in calculating the pensionary benefits. Relying on a decision of this Court in the case of Executive Engineer Panchayat (Maa and M) Department vs. Samudabhai Jyotibhai Bhedi ., reported in 2017 (4) GLR 2952, Mr.Ghevariya, learned counsel submits that by a decision rendered in this case, this Court has specifically held that for the purposes of computing the number of years of service, provisions of Section 25-B of the Industrial Disputes Act need to be taken into account.