SHREE AYURVED VIKAS MANDAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this group of matters, the issues involved are interconnected and therefore all these matters are taken up for final disposal with the consent of learned advocates appearing for the parties.

(2.) Before we discuss the factual matrix of the aforesaid matters, it is required to be noted that Special Civil Application No.18548 of 2014 is filed by Shri Ayurved Vikas Mandal, Lodra, a Charitable Trust (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trust') challenging the order dated 4.12.2014 passed by the respondent -State Government whereas Special Civil Application No.8839 of 2015 has been filed by 23 employees, teaching as well as non -teaching staff, working at Shri Ayurved Vikas Mandal, Lodra i.e. the Trust, wherein they have prayed that the notice/order dated 18.5.2015 passed by the management/Trust be quashed and set aside and the respondents be directed to transfer the employees to any other college -hospital receiving grant -in - aid. In both the petitions, the learned Single Judge issued notice and the petitions were pending for hearing.

(3.) In the meantime, the employees filed Civil Application for direction wherein they prayed that the respondents be directed to transfer the services of the employees to any grant -in -aid Ayurvedic College in the State of Gujarat and also to pay regular monthly salary with effect from 18.5.2015. The learned Single Judge passed an order on 20.1.2016 in the said Civil Application whereby the learned Single Judge directed the employer to pay monthly salary regularly month -wise to the employees. The respondent -State Government was also directed to accommodate six employees who have been allotted to the respondent -Trust by way of transfer to any other grant -in -aid institutions and so far as other 19 employees are concerned, the direction is given to the management/Trust to make a request to the respondent -State to consider their case sympathetically. Thus, against the order dated 20.1.2016 passed in the Civil Application by the learned Single Judge, the Trust has preferred Letters Patent Appeal No.125 of 2016 whereas the State has challenged the said order by filing Letters Patent Appeal No.252 of 2016. When both the aforesaid Letters Patent Appeals were listed for hearing before us, learned advocates appearing for all the parties requested that the Special Civil Applications pending before the learned Single Judge be called for and this Court may decide the entire issue. Accordingly, vide dated 23.3.2016, Registry was directed to list the aforesaid Special Civil Applications for hearing before this Court and thereafter all the aforesaid matters were heard at length.