1. The present Civil Revision Application u/s.115 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been preferred by the applicant herein – original judgement-debtor- defendant to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 21/07/2007 passed by learned 5th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Junagadh – Executing Court in Execution Application No.195 of 2000, by which, learned Executing Court has directed the applicant herein to pay Rs.50,525/- within a period of one month, failing which, to issue Jangam warrant against the applicant herein.
2. Facts leading to the present Civil Revision Application, in nutshell, are as under:
That the respondent herein – original plaintiff instituted Regular Civil Suit No.266 of 1981 in the Court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Junagadh challenging the action of applicant herein – original defendant in placing the plaintiff as Senior Accounts Clerk and for declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to be continued as an employee in Revenue Department and is entitled to all other consequential benefits as an employee in Revenue Department. Original plaintiff also prayed for permanent injunction.
That learned Joint Civil Judge (J.D.), Junagadh by order dated 30/4/1984 decreeing the suit and granted declaration that the plaintiff is to be continued as an employee in Revenue Department and directed the original defendant to place the plaintiff in the seniority list as Aval Karkun and/or on equivalent post from 14/09/1972 and accordingly to put the plaintiff in the pay scale of Aval Karkun w.e.f. 01/01/1973.
Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgement and decree passed by learned Trial Court, the applicant herein preferred appeal before learned District Court, Junagadh being Regular Civil Appeal No.99 of 1984 and the learned 5th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Junagadh dismissed the said appeal confirming the judgement and decree passed by the learned Trial Court.
It appears that thereafter the decree was not fully executed and, therefore, the original plaintiff filed Execution Application No.195 of 2000 before learned Executing Court by submitting that the plaintiff was not to be put in the pay-scale equivalent to the Aval Karkun i.e. 1640-2900 and wrongly put in the pay-scale of 1400-2600 and, therefore, it was requested to direct the original defendant – judgement-debtor to pay difference in pay-scale i.e. Rs.50,525/- and some other reliefs were further prayed for. That vide order dated 21/07/2007, learned Executing Court has partly allowed the said Execution Application and directed the applicant herein to pay balance amount of Rs.50,525/- by observing that as per judgement and decree passed by learned Trial Court, the plaintiff was required to place in the pay-scale of Aval Karkun treating an employee in the Revenue Department and the plaintiff has been wrongly put in the pay-scale of 1400-2600.
Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order passed by learned Executing Court, the applicant herein preferred the present Civil Revision Application u/s.115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
3. Mr.Dhiren Mehta, learned advocate appearing for Mr.Hathi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant herein has vehemently submitted that as learned Executing Court has materially erred in holding that the respondent herein – original plaintiff was entitled to get pay- scale of Aval Karkun in Revenue Department. It is submitted that as such the plaintiff exercised the option of Panchayat employee in the Panchayat Department and, therefore, he was not entitled to the pay-scale of Aval Karkun, which is in the Revenue Department.
4. The present Civil Revision Application is opposed by Mr.Udit Mehta, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent herein – original plaintiff. It is submitted that considering the judgement and decree, which was sought to be executed and when it was specifically decreed that the plaintiff is to be continued an an employee in Revenue Department and place the plaintiff in the seniority list of Aval Karkun and/or equivalent post in the revenue department, learned Executing Court has not committed any error in placing the plaintiff in the pay-scale of 1640-2900 and directed the applicant herein to pay difference in the pay-scale i.e. Rs.50,525/-. Therefore, it is requested to dismiss the present Civil Revision Application.
5. Having heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and considering the judgement and decree passed by learned Trial Court, which was sought to be executed, it appears that the same is very clear and unambiguous. Learned Trial Court has quashed the action of the original defendant in treating the plaintiff as Senior Accounts Clerk. Learned Trial Court has specifically decreed the suit directing the original defendant to treat the plaintiff as an employee in the Revenue Department as Aval Karkun and on equivalent post and directed the original defendant to place the plaintiff in the seniority list of Aval Karkun from 14/09/1972 and the plaintiff – judgement debtor was entitled to the pay-scale of Aval Karkum w.e.f. 01/01/1973, as directed by the learned Executing Court. Despite the above, the defendant- judgement debtor placed the plaintiff in the pay-
scale of Rs.1400-2600 and not placed the plaintiff in the pay- scale of Rs.1640-2900, which was available to the Aval Karkun in Revenue Department. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, when learned Executing Court has directed the applicant herein – original defendant to pay Rs.50,525/- being difference in the pay-scale, it cannot be said that learned Executing Court has committed any error and/or illegality, which calls for interference of this Court in exercise of power u/s.115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
6. In view of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove, the present Civil Revision Application fails and the same deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. Rule is discharged. Ad-interim relief, if any, stands vacated forthwith.
[M.R.SHAH,J] *dipti