MAKHABHAI BHURABHAI DIDOR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Soaham Joshi, learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 and 4, Ms. Chaitali Dave, learned advocate, waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondents Nos. 2 and 3. With consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.

(2.) The short issue in this petition is that the petitioners (legal heirs of deceased workmen), who have otherwise earned the benefits of the Resolution dtd. 17/10/1988 are not being paid pension ignoring the past services rendered by the deceased workmen from the initial date of appointment. Looking to the orders of Payment of Gratuity Authority passed in favour of each of the petitioners, they have been shown to have completed ten years of service in which they have worked for more than 240 days. The only reason put forth by the authorities to deny the petitioner the pension is that after he was made permanent, he has not completed 10 years of qualifying service, however if the date of joining of the petitioner is considered, the petitioner has evidently completed the qualifying period to be entitled to pension as per law laid down in Samudabhai Jyotibhai Bhedi reported in 2017(4) GLR 2952.

(3.) Mr. Dave, learned counsel for the petitioner, would rely on order dtd. 18/9/2019 rendered in Special Civil Application No. 14137 of 2019, which read as under: