BALVANTSING SURSING DABHI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr. C. M. Joshi waives service of rule. In the facts of the ease with the consent of the parties the petition is directed to be heard today.

(2.) The petitioner is serving as Dresser with respondent No. 3 i. e. in the office of the Medical Superintendent Civil Hospital Ahmedabad. The petitioner claims that he belongs to Class IV service and he is entitled to continue in service upto the age of 60 years. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that he will be superannuated on this basis on 30/06/1990 The petitioner rests his claim on the basis of definition of Class IV contained in B. C. S. R. The relevant Rule containing the definition is Rule 9(27). It reads as follows: 9 Class IV Service means service performed by the Government servants included in Appendix III and service remunerated in a time scale of pay the maximum of which does not exceed Rs. 270 in the case of Government servants not so included. It is an admitted position that figure of Rs. 270.00 occurring in the aforesaid definition has been substituted by Rs. 1150.00 in the definition clause. The post of Dresser is not included in Appendix III but the service of the petitioner is remunerated in time scale of pay the maximum of which does not exceed Rs 1150 Therefore the second criterion is fulfilled and the petitioners post falls in Class IV. In this view of the matter the petitioner would be entitled to continue in service upto the age of sixty years.

(3.) The petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the correctness of his birth date as recorded in his service record. But at the time of hearing of the petition the learned Counsel for the petitioner has fairly conceded that he does not challenge the legality and validity of the correctness of the birth date recorded in his service record. Therefore this question is not required to be decided.