STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. ARVIND H VYAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Letters Patent Appeal No. 186/92 was admitted by order dated 28/04/1992; whereas Letters Patent Appeal No.185/92 was admitted vide order dated 25/06/1992 and a direction was given that Letters Patent Appeal No.185/92 should be heard with Letters Patent Appeal No.186/92. Letters Patent Appeal No.269/92 was also admitted by order dated 25/06/1992 and a direction was given that this appeal should be heard with Letters Patent Appeal No.186/92. The three appeals involve identical question of facts and law and, therefore, in view of the joint request made by the learned Counsel for the parties, we propose to dispose of them by this common judgment.

(2.) The respondent no.1 in Letters Patent Appeal No.185/92 was appointed as a Forest Guard on February 24, 1977. At the relevant time he was working as such in Forest Department at Chotila. The respondent no.2 was appointed as Forest Guard on 23/03/1977 and at the relevant time he was working as such at Halvad. The first two respondents in Letters Patent Appeal No.186/92 were appointed as Forest Guards on 24/02/1977; whereas respondent no.3 in the said appeal was appointed as Grade Chokidar on 1/10/1977. The first two respondents were serving as Forest Guards at the relevant time, though at different places and respondent no.3 was serving as an Orderly Guard at Surendranagar at the relevant time. The respondent no.1 in Letters Patent Appeal No.269/92 joined service as Forest Guard on March 8, 1977; whereas respondent no.2 was appointed as Forest Guard by an order dated 30/12/1976. From the record of the case, it is evident that nearly five years after appointment of the respondents as Forest Guard/Grade Chokidar, it was realised by Divisional Forest Officer, Surendranagar that they and other employees were irregularily recruited. Therefore, appellant no.1 in Letters Patent Appeal passed an order dated 7/05/1981 terminating the services of the respondents in these three appeals and others with effect from 8/05/1981. A copy of order passed by the appellant no.1 on 7/05/1981 is produced by the respondents with their respective petitions. The respondent no.1 in Letters Patent Appeal No.185/92 figures at serial no.1, whereas respondent no.2 in the said appeal figures at serial no.3 in the order dated May 7, 1981 passed by the Divisional Forest Officer, Surendranagar. The respondent no.1 in Letters Patent Appeal No.186/92 figures at serial no.2 in the said order and respondent no.2 in the said appeal figures at serial no.5 in the said order; whereas respondent no.3 figures at serial no.8 in the said order. The name of respondent no.1 in Letters Patent Appeal No.269/92 is shown at serial no.4 in the said order, whereas name of respondent no.2 in the said appeal is shown at serial no.7 in the said order. It may be stated that services of Mr. J.I.Joshi who was appointed as Forest Guard, were also terminated by the Divisional Forest Officer by order dated 7/05/1981 and his name was shown at serial no.6 in the said order. Mr. J.I.Joshi had challenged order terminating his services by instituting Special Civil Application No. 1926/81. The respondents in Letters Patent Appeal No.186/92 had challenged order terminating their services by filing Special Civil Application No.1849/81; whereas the respondents in Letters Patent Appeal No.185/92 had instituted Special Civil Application No.1871/81 challenging the order by which their services were terminated.

(3.) It may be stated that Special Civil Applications No. 1849/81, 1871/81 and 1926/81 were heard together and they were allowed by common order dated 27/08/1991 which was passed by the learned Single Judge. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment rendered in Special Civil Application No. 1926/81, State of Gujarat through its Secretary to Government, Forest and Environment Department, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar had preferred Letters Patent Appeal No.49/92. The said appeal was partly allowed by Division Bench comprising S.B.Majmudar, Actg. C.J. (as he then was) and Y.B.Bhatt,J. by judgment dated 30/03/1992. In the above numbered appeal, the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge to the effect that order terminating services of Mr. J.I.Joshi, who had filed Special Civil Application No. 1926/81 was illegal, was upheld by the appellate bench, but it was found that during the interregnum period, Mr. J.I.Joshi was employed gainfully and, therefore, direction was given to the Conservator of Forests, Junagadh Circle to hear him on the aspect of backwages and pass appropriate orders. The appeal was allowed only to this extent by judgment dated 30/03/1992. Though Special Civil Applications No. 1849/81 and 1871/81 were disposed of with Special Civil Application No. 1926/81, the appeals in those petitions could not be filed with Letters Patent Appeal No. 49/92 which was directed against judgment rendered in Special Civil Applications No.1849/81 and 1871/81, as there was delay in filing appeals. In those two matters, applications for condonation of delay caused in filing the appeals were filed, which were allowed and subsequently the appeals were entertained and admitted as referred to hereinabove. So far as Letters Patent Appeal No.269/92 is concerned, the respondents had filed Special Civil Application No. 1842/81 challenging legality of order by which their services were terminated. The said petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge by judgment dated September, 1991, against which Divisional Forest Officer, Surendranagar and State of Gujarat have filed Letters Patent Appeal No.269/92. In the above referred to writ petitions, following directions are given by the learned Single Judge: