(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH)
1. Heard Learned Senior Advocate Mr K M Patel assisted by Learned Advocate Mr Varun K Patel appears for the applicants/original appellants. Learned Advocate Mr A.S. Supehia appearing for the opponent/original respondent has filed leave note.
2. The present group of Misc. Civil Applications has been filed by the applicants/original appellants under Order 47 Rule 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 read with Clause 15 of Letters Patent for recall/review of the CAV judgment and order dated 11.11.2011 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.1206 of 2008.
3. Learned Senior Advocate for the applicants/original appellants has mainly submitted that while deciding the appeal, no corresponding direction has been given in the judgment requiring the employee to refund the amount taken under the settlement. Moreover he has submitted that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case it is necessary to clarify that such benefits would accrue only prospectively and not for the past period.
4. While deciding Special Civil Application No.15584 of 2003 with Special Civil Applications No.15945 of 2003 to Special Civil Application No. 15967 of 2003, the learned Single Judge has given certain directions in para 16 of the order dated 28.12.2007. Para 16 of the said order which is the operative part, reads as under:
"16.
In view of the aforesaid discussions this court is inclined to issue the following directions to the corporation :-
The Respondent Corporation is directed to consider the claim of the petitioners and other similarly situated for grant of Higher Pay Scale and up-gradation with appropriate effect as it granted the said benefit to those 14 employees after taking into considerations all the relevant aspects like seniority, and if other wise they were found to be eligible for such benefit.
(2) The Respondent Corporation would be at liberty to deny the benefit to those petitioners who could not have been other wise also promoted on account of some departmental proceedings or other handicaps.
The Respondent Corporation shall record reasons and communicate the same to the petitioner if in his case the claim was not acceptable.
The corporation shall undertake this exercise as soon as possible and accord the benefit with appropriate dates."
5. While deciding the Letters Patent Appeal, we have come to the conclusion that we do not find any infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge and we find ourselves in complete agreement with the same. Now, as per the submissions of the learned Senior Advocate for the applicants/original appellants if any clarification is required related to the benefits as referred above, then the applicants/original appellants should adopt the proper procedure for the same in accordance with law. But so far as the order dated 11.11.2011 passed in the Letters Patent Appeal is concerned, there appears no apparent error on the face of the record and hence this group of Misc. Civil Applications deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.
[V.M.
SAHAI, J.] [G.
B. SHAH, J.] msp Top