DISTRICT PRIMARY EDUCATION Vs. PRAVINCHANDRA HARJIVAN PANDYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. In view of the order which I propose to pass in this Civil Revision Application, I do not consider it to be necessary and proper to give out all the facts of the case and the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties. The facts of the case, which are necessary for the disposal of this Civil Revision Application shortly stated are as follows.

(2.) The respondent-plaintiff Nos. 1 to 7 filed Regular Civil Suit No.78/95 in the court of Civil Judge (SD), Gondal. Along with the suit the respondents-plaintiffs filed application at Exh.5 for grant of interim injunction in their favour. The respondent-plaintiff Nos. 1 to 7 are the teachers and Principal of the Primary School at Gondal Taluka. The suit pertains to the dispute at what rate the House Rent Allowance has to be given to these teachers and the Principal of a Primary School of the Taluka concerned. It appears from the facts of the case that the State of Gujarat has classified cities for the purpose of prescribing rate at which its employees are to get House Rent Allowance. There appears to be a provision in the scheme that those employees who are serving in the villages, which is within the limits of 8 Kms. of a particular classified city and due to the scarcity of suitable residential building if they reside in the classified city are eligible for House Rent Allowance, at the rate at which is given to the employees of that classified city.

(3.) In this case, the plaintiffs-respondents are getting the House Rent Allowance at the rate, which is admissible to the employees of that classified city where they are residing though they are working in the villages. The Taluka Officer under his order dated 15/12/95 ordered to stop the Bhatta to be given to the plaintiff-respondents at the rate it is payable to the employees of that classified cities where they are residing and ordered that they are entitled under this head Rs.50.00 p.m. The learned Trial Court granted the application filed by the plaintiffs-respondents and they have been protected by grant of interim injunction. This order of the trial court is challenged by the petitioners and the respondent Nos 8 and 9 in District Court. Under the impugned order of the Appellate Court both the appeals were came to be rejected. The State of Gujarat and District Local Fund Examiner have not preferred any revision application before this court. However, the petitioner, the District Primary Education Officer, Rajkot has chosen to file this revision application.