PINAKIN N. TRIVED Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioners employed in Homeopathic Medical Colleges run by non-government public trusts and institutions receiving grant-in-aid from the Government of Gujarat, with a prayer to quash and set aside Government Resolution dated 21.11.1998 issued by the Department of Health and Family Welfare, Government of Gujarat, by which, conditions Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 11 came to be deleted and wherever a reference was made to General Provident Fund [GPF] in condition Nos. 10, 12 and 13 to be replaced by Contributory Provident Fund [CPF]. By deletion of the above condition, the petitioners are deprived of certain retiral benefits which are available to the employees of the State of Gujarat and similarly situated employees working in non-government Ayurvedic Colleges getting grant-in-aid from the Government of Gujarat.

(2.) In the above back-drop of facts, Mr. N.K. Majumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that, when teaching and non-teaching staff of non-government Ayurvedic Medical Colleges as well as Allopathy Medical Colleges receiving grant-in-aid are conferred all benefits, a different treatment to the petitioners depriving of such benefits itself is discriminatory ad the decision of the respondents to deny such benefits is unreasonable and arbitrary exercise of powers in violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and, therefore, this Court may interfere in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and set aside the impugned decision, as prayed for. Besides, all the petitioners worked under the same department of the Government of Gujarat, namely, Department of Health and Family Welfare, and the employees of one branch of medicine are conferred benefits depriving the employees of other branch of medicine almost discharging similar duties again amounts to discrimination, which is illegal and needs to be set right. It is next contended that, once the benefits are conferred by Government Resolution dated 13.11.1998, deletion of certain conditions vide the impugned Government Resolution dated 21.11.1998 and that too without assigning any reasons and affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners is violative of principles of natural justice and, further, exercise of powers by the Authority in absence of reasons reveals non-application of mind and, for the grounds as above, the impugned decision is to be struck down. It is further submitted that right from 1976 when a decision was taken by the State Government on the basis of communication or letter dated 3.3.1975 by the Government of India to strengthen Homeopathic Branch of Indian Medicine and to provide grant-in-aid to Homeopathic research even at private teaching institutions and hospitals, for all purposes, the employees like the petitioners who were treated on par with the government employees for receiving pay-scale and other allowances and benefits and further similarly situated employees in other non-governmental grant-in-aid colleges where the employees were conferred benefits, deprivation of similar benefits by the State Authority is not justified particularly when till 2005 the subject matter was under consideration. It is, therefore, submitter that the petitioners for all purpsoes having requisite qualification performing similar duties and conferred other benefits on par with government employees deserve to be treated even for receiving retiral dues including pension and, thus, the present petition may be allowed and the relief as prayed for may be granted.

(3.) Per contra, the learned AGP has basically relied upon the affidavit-in-reply filed by the Joint Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, State of Gujarat, and submitted that in a matter conferring benefits to the employees like the petitioners who are from non-governmental grant-in-aid colleges is an executive decision and is a matter of policy for the State of Gujarat. Besides, providing 100% expenditure towards pay-scale or maintenance and even exercising control over such institutions by itself would not be sufficient to confer benefits upon the petitioners as claimed. The employees of the State Government and their service conditions are governed by Gujarat Civil Services (Classification & Control) Rules, Disciplinary Appeal Rules and Pension Rules framed in exercise of powers conferred under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India. No parity can be conferred upon the petitioners who are serving non-government colleges and recruited accordingly. It is also submitted that the decision of the State government to extend benefits to the employees of non-government Ayurvedic Medical Colleges receiving grant-in-aid was based on the consideration of nature of system of ayurvedic medicine, its availability and acceptability and requirement based on belief of the people at large. It is further submitted that parity in pay-scale, similarity of performance of duties, qualification of employees in both systems, namely, Homeopathic and Ayurvedic, are based on working of such system and administrative exigency. Even the government resolution referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioners would reveal that the petitioners were conferred only benefits about pay-scale and no other benefits were conferred. Considering the above, the petition deserves to be rejected.