DISTRICT DEVLOPMENT OFFICER Vs. PURSHOTTAM D KAMLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr.Patel, learned Counsel for the respondent waives service of notice of Rule.

(2.) With the consent of both the sides, the matter is finally heard today. The short facts of the case are that the respondent who was in employment with the District Panchayat as Gram Sevak opted for voluntary retirement on 31.12.1989, however, the case of the respondent is that he was recruited on 5.10.1959 and later on he was allotted to Valsad District. At the time of retirement, the pay-scale of the respondent was 1400-40-1800-EB-50-2300. There is no dispute on the point that the respondent worked with the District Panchayat and as per the petitioner the selection grade was given to the respondent from 10.6.1988. After the retirement of the respondent, it appears that the dispute was raised by the respondent that he should have been granted benefit of the higher pay-scale as per the policy of the Government vide Resolution dated 5.7.1991 as well as Resolution dated 16.8.1994 upon completion of 9 years, 18 years and 27 years of service. Since the same was not given the respondent approached the Civil Service Tribunal by preferring an Appeal No.243 of 2000. It appears that the Tribunal found that the option was forwarded on 24.8.1992, but as per the District Panchayat, the said option was time barred and, therefore, the same could not be considered. The Tribunal found that in view of the decision of this Court, Special Civil Application No.4977 of 1996 in case of "Sushilaben I. Dave v. District Panchayat Bhavnagar & Ors.", reported in 2000(1)GCD, 186 (Guj.), even if there is a delay, such an option cannot be ignored and the authority is required to consider the same on merits. The Tribunal thereafter by relying upon the decision of this Court has allowed the appeal and has set aside the order of the authority declining the higher pay-scale and further directed for conferring the higher pay-scale to the respondent as per the judgement dated 12.5.2003 and under the circumstances, the petitioner DDO has approached this Court by preferring the present petition. Heard Mr.Munshaw, learned Counsel with Mr.Barot for the petitioner and Mr.Patel for respondent.

(3.) It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction for conferring in a matter of higher pay-scale which is not granted in view of the decision dated 27.8.2004 of this Court (Coram: Miss R.M. Doshit, J.) in case of "State of Gujarat v. B.L. Trivedi and Anr.", in SCA No.1852 of 2004 and, therefore, it has been submitted that the order is without jurisdiction.