Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

State Of Gujarat Thro Secretary & 4 ­

High Court Of Gujarat|21 June, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1649 of 1987 For Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
Whether this case involves a substantial question 4 of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?
5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
========================================================= PUSHPABEN PREMNJIBHAI PATEL & 21 ­ Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT THRO' SECRETARY & 4 ­ Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance :
MR SV RAJU for Petitioner(s) : 1, 3, MS ROOPAL R PATEL for Petitioner(s) : 2, DELETED for Petitioner(s) : 4 ­ 22.
MR PRANAV DAVE AGP for Respondent(s) : 1 ­ 2. MR AMIT M PANCHAL for Respondent(s) : 3, MR NC THAKKAR for Respondent(s) : 4, MR NC SHAH for Respondent(s) : 5, MR NV GANDHI for Respondent(s) : 5, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 21/06/2012 ORAL JUDGMENT 1, By way of this petition, the petitioners have prayed to issue appropriate directions to the respondents to pay salary to the petitioners as per the documents annexed at Annexure­D to the petition and the arrears of salary from 01.01.1973 onwards as per the recommendation of the Desai Pay Commission and other ancillary benefits.
2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner herein was serving as a Primary School Teacher in respondent no. 4 – School at the relevant point of time. It is the case of the petitioner that though the respondent School is recognized by the Government, it had not implemented the pay scales which were formulated from time to time. By way of filing the present petition, the petitioner has prayed to direct the respondents to grant her benefits of Desai Pay Commission with effect from 01.01.1973 along with arrears and as per the document annexed at Annexure­D to the petition.
3. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. The petitioner herein has claimed benefits as per the Desai Pay Commission with effect from 01.01.1973. However, the present petition came to be filed only on 24.03.1987. The document at Annexure­D on the basis on which the petitioner herein has claimed the benefits is from January, 1975. However, in view of the provisions of Clause­7 of the Schedule­II of the Limitation Act, 1963, the petitioner shall be entitled for the benefits only for a period of three years from the date when the amount becomes due.
4. In the present case since the petition was filed on 24.03.1987, the petitioner shall be entitled for the benefits with effect from 25.03.1984 and not as per the date mentioned in the document annexed at Annexure­D. Looking to the facts of the case, it would be relevant to refer to a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Shiv Dass v. Union of India & Ors., AIR 2007 SC 1330. In that case, it has been held that if petition is filed beyond a reasonable period, say three years, normally, the Court would reject the same or restrict the relief. In the present case, as stated herein above,, the present petition came to be filed only on 24.03.1987 and the petitioner herein has claimed the benefits is from January, 1975. Thus, the petition came to be filed after a delay of more than 12 years and no explanation has come from the petitioner as regards the said delay. Hence, only on the ground of delay, the relief as prayed for cannot be granted.
5. In view of the above, the petition is partly allowed. It is held that the petitioner shall be entitled for the benefit with effect from 25.03.1984 till 24.03.1987 along with interest @ 12% per annum, as per calculation placed on record.
6. . With the above observations and directions, the petition stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute. No order as to costs.
[K.S. JHAVERI, J.] /phalguni/
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

State Of Gujarat Thro Secretary & 4 ­

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgementDate
21 June, 2012
Judges
  • Ks Jhaveri
Advocates
  • Mr Sv Raju
  • Ms Roopal R Patel