VIPUL SURENDRABHAI BAXI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Mr. Niraj Ashar, learned AGP waives service of Rule for respondent No.1. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- (A) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction by directing the respondents to forthwith regularize the services of the petitioner and convert the post of the petitioner from work charge establishment to temporary establishment from the date on which the said benefits are extended to his other co-employee Mr. Anilkumar N. Rana who were appointed along with him vide appointment order No.163 of 1982 dtd. 31.7.1982. (B) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction by directing the respondents to extend the benefits of higher pay scale to the petitioner and fix the pay scale of the petitioner at par with his other co-employee Mr. Anilkumar N. Rana who were appointed along with him vide appointment order No.163 of 1982 dtd. 31.7.1982. (C) Pending admission hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to order/direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of the services of the petitioner and conversion of the post of the petitioner from work charge establishment to temporary establishment from the date on which the said benefits are extended to his other co-employee Mr. Anilkumar N. Rana who were appointed along with him vide appointment order No.163 of 1982 dtd. 31.7.1982. (D) Pending admission hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to order/direct the respondents to fix the pay scale of the petitioner at par with the other co-employee Mr. Anilkumar N. Rana who were appointed along with him vide office order No.163 of 1982 dtd. 31.7.1982. (E) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant any such other & further reliefs deemed just and proper in view of the facts and circumstances of this case and in the interest of justice.

(2.) MR. J.A. Adeshra, learned advocate for the petitioner has specifically drawn attention of this Court to the averments made in Para 3.14 of the present petition and has relied upon the order dated 18.8.2011 passed by this Court (Coram: H.K. Rathod, J.) in Special Civil Application No.10083 of 2011 (Annexure-G to the petition). MR. Adeshra submitted that the present petitioner and the petitioner of Special Civil Application No.10083 of 2011 are similarly situated and therefore, in the interest of justice, this Court may be pleased to pass a similar order which was passed in Special Civil Application No.10083 of 2011.

(3.) IT would also be open for the petitioner to file a further representation. If the petitioner so desires to file a representation, the petitioner may do so within a period of one week from today. If such a representation is made, the authorities shall consider the said representation along with the recommendation dated 25.9.2008, as aforesaid, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such a representation.