MEDICAL OFFICER Vs. PRAVINCHANDRA GIRDHARLAL PANDYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI Pravinchandra Girdharlal Pandya present Respondent No. 1 original petitioner, had filed writ petition i. e. Special Civil Application No. 3734 of 1988 before this Court, praying that the respondents (i) State of Gujarat, (ii) Director of Indian Medicines and Homoeopathic System, (iii) Medical Officer (Cl. II), Government Rural Health Center, bhurakhiya, Tal. Lathi, District Amreli, and (iv) the District Panchayat, Amreli, be directed to regularize the petitioner's service as peon and grant him all consequential benefit of service, including the difference of salary. This petition of 1988 was finally allowed on 02. 04. 2004 by the learned Single Judge of this Court with a direction to the respondents to consider the original petitioner as regularly appointed employee for all purpose and to give him all admissible service benefits available to a regularly appointed employee, including that of arrears of salary, subject to adjustment of the amount which was already paid to him as a daily wager. The original respondents authorities were directed to comply with the said order within three months from the date of receipt of the order. The period of three months has already over since long but so far the order passed by the learned Single Judge is not complied with on the ground of pendency of this appeal, without any interim orders obtained from this Court.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel Shri Munshaw for the appellants Medical Officer (Primary Health centre) and District Development Officer, Amreli submitted that the learned Single Judge committed grave error in allowing the writ petition and issuing the aforesaid direction. He submitted that the Respondent No. 1-original petitioner was never appointed as peon on regular basis. He was working as part-timer and by issuing such directions back door entry is given to the Respondent No. 1 original petitioner, as he was never eligible to be appointed as peon in 1986 because he was over-age as his age was 43 in 1986 and that his name was neither forwarded by the Social Welfare Officer nor by the District Employment Officer, amreli, to the Director of Indian Medicine and Homoeopathic system-original Respondent no. 2 and present Respondent No. 3 in this appeal.

(3.) BEFORE appreciating the aforesaid submissions made by Shri Munshaw for the appellants few important facts are required to be stated which are as under: "the original petitioner-Respondent No. 1 herein was working as peon in Ayurvedic dispensary at village Bhurakhiya, Taluka Lathi, District Amreli since 1963, as part-time peon on a fixed salary of Rs. 10/- with effect from 01. 03. 1963. Thereafter, he was paid Rs. 15/- per month with effect from 01. 12. 1968 and from 01. 04. 1972 he was paid the salary of Rs. 30/- per month. On 03. 07. 1979 his salary was fixed at Rs. 125. 50 paise per month. In 1986 the State of Gujarat passed resolution dated 17. 03. 1986 upgrading the dispensary, in which the original petitioner was working, run by the district Panchayat, Amreli, and by a subsequent Resolution dated 16. 08. 1986 the State government sanctioned one post of Medical Officer (Cl. II), one post of peon and one post of Compounder. Thus, since 1986, it was under the control and financed by the state Government. Instead of regularizing the services of the original petitioner as peon, who was working with them for more than 23 years on a fixed salary, they decided to fill-up newly created post of peon by inviting the names from the District Employment exchange and District Social Welfare Officer, Amreli and appointed one Shri Dabasara on the said post by ignoring the claim of the original petitioner. The petitioner was not appointed on regular basis on the post of peon on the ground that he was over-age and that his name was not forwarded to the Director of Indian Medicines and Homoeopathic system Respondent No. 2 in 1986. Within six months of his appointment Shri Dabasara was transferred. It may be noted that during the pendency of the petition when Shri dabasara was working as peon and after his transfer they continued to take work from the original petitioner as peon without appointing anyone else on the said post on regular basis till the retirement of Respondent No. 1 original petitioner i. e. in 2003.