PATEL DAKSHABEN GULABBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since common issue is involved in the captioned writ petitions, the same are heard analogously and are being decided by this common judgment.

(2.) The present petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the respective petitioners against the ex-facie illegal and arbitrary action of respondent Nos.4 and 5 in not approving the benefit of Higher Pay Scales to the petitioners by considering the entire service rendered by the petitioners including the service rendered in Ashramshala prior to their absorption / lien in the District Education Committee, though in cases of exactly similarly situated 9 (Nine) other teachers, the respondent Nos.4 and 5 have already approved such benefit.

(3.) The brief facts leading to the present petitions in nutshell are that, the petitioners were duly appointed as primary teachers in Ashramshalas of Valsad district in 1990. Though the petitioners were entitled to be absorbed in the District Education Committee as per the Government policy, they were illegally denied such benefit. The petitioners, therefore, preferred Special Civil Applications before this Court. Consequently, the State Government granted the benefit of absorption / lien to the petitioners by order dtd. 18/4/2006 and the respondent No.3 accordingly, passed the order of absorption / lien dtd. 29/7/2006. The respondent No.3, thereafter, passed orders granting the benefit of Higher Pay- scales and also for joining the service rendered by the petitioners in Ashramshalas for the purposes of pension, leave and pay and allowances. However, the respondent No.4 had declined to approve the Higher Pay-scales sanctioned to the petitioners by the respondent No.3 by stating in his letter that the service rendered by the petitioners in Ashramshalas from 1990 to 2000 and 1990 to 2003 respectively, cannot be counted for the purpose of the said benefit. That, the respondent Nos.4 and 5 have remained adamant on their such illegal stand despite repeated representations made to them by the petitioners.