KANTILAL CHHAGANDAS PATEL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF HIGHER EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMIT. Learned advocates appear and waive service of notice of admission on behalf of the respective respondents.

(2.) The present Letters Patent Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, 1865, is directed against the order dtd. 20/7/2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in the captioned writ petition to the extent of denying the interest on the retirement benefits.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr.Vaibhav Vyas, appearing for the appellant has submitted that in fact, the appellant would be entitled to interest since he was illegally dismissed from the services on 10/10/1995. It is submitted that the District Education Officer has refused to grant the approval to the dismissal order and hence, the appellant filed an Application No.119 of 2001 claiming the retirement benefits fixing his pension as well as revision of pay as per 5th Pay Commission. By the judgment dtd. 17/6/2004, the Gujarat Educational Institutions Services Tribunal, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred as 'the Tribunal') allowed the application and directed the management to revise the salary and pay the arrears of salary from 1/1/1996 till 31/10/2000 and also to pay the provisional pension to the appellant along with all consequential benefits.