BIPINCHANDRA T SHAH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court for a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to give to the petitioner all the benefits which are made available to the Government servants from the date of transfer of petitioner's services to the respondent-Panchayat till his resignation and all consequential benefits which are available to the Government servants. Petitioner was recruited on June 27, 1961 in the service and his services were with the then Municipality of Vanthali, however, in view of Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961, the Municipality of Vanthali was converted into a Nagar Panchayat under the provisions of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961 and his services came to be transferred to the respondent-Panchayat.

(2.) On conversion of Municipality into Nagar Panchayat, all the members of the staff who were in services of Municipality stood transferred to Panchayatrespondent No. 2. Petitioner has averred that he has continued to be a Government servant right from June 27, 1961. It is averred by the petitioner that he is entitled to revision of pay and promotional avenues open to the Government servants. Petitioner has averred that in not granting benefits to the petitioner, the respondents have acted arbitrarily. The petitioner has further averred that the action of the respondents in not granting benefits to him is arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution. This Court issued notice on 24-1-1985. No Return was filed. Considering the averments made in the petition on 15-4-1985, the Court issued a Rule, which was made returnable on 1st July, 1985. Till this date, on behalf of respondents, no reply is filed. On 7th February, 1985, this Court (Coram : S. B. Majmudar, J. as His Lordship then was), passed the following order and granted interim relief :-

(3.) . In absence of Return, the Court has issued Rule and even today, the respondents have not bothered to file reply. In absence of reply, considering the averments made in the petition, it is clear that the petitioner who was a Municipal employee, came to be transferred to the Panchayat service and thus the petitioner achieved the status of a Government servant. The status so acquired cannot be extinguished so long as the post which the petitioner was occupying was not abolished. Moreover, his services were not terminated in accordance with the provisions of Art. 311 of the Constitution of India. The Apex Court in the case of State of Gujarat and Anr. v. Ramanlal Keshavlal Soni and Ors., reported in AIR 1984 SC 161, held that :