( 1 ) THE present petition is field by All Gujarat Employees Association against the Gujarat Dairy Development Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as "gddc Limited"), Abad Dairy and the State of Gujarat, through the Secretary, Finance Department, for the reliefs as set out in para 6 of the petition, wherein a writ of mandamus is prayed for to hold that the action of the respondents of not giving forms or not permitting the Badli workers for opting voluntary retirement scheme (hereinafter referred to as "vrs") is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

( 2 ) THE case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a registered trade union under the provisions of the Trade Unions Act, 1926 and is therefore, entitled to represent the grievances of its members before any authority or court of law. It is the case of the petitioner union that the members of the petitioner union who were working under Abad Dairy since 1982 and thereafter and have completed service of 10 years or more and that they have been continued and their names are borne on the muster roll till today under the provisions of sec. 25d of the Industrial Disputes Act (neither in para 1 nor in para 2 it is mentioned that the petitioner is making grievance about Badli workers ).

( 3 ) MR. A. K. Clerk submitted that respondent no. 1 issued a circular dated 8. 7. 1999 bearing No. GDDC/ Adm/ 99/ 1108, whereby the officers and the employees working in GDDC Limited were given an opportunity to opt for VRS, the details of which are set out in that circular. A copy of the circular is produced at Annexure c, page 20. Mr. Clerk submitted that the said circular, in its opening para states that earlier by circulars dated 9. 1. 1998, 15. 9. 1998 and 5. 1. 1999, applications were invited for VRS. All those circulars are cancelled and by the present circular (i. e. 8. 7. 1999) de novo applications are invited for VRS. Mr. Clerk submitted that the circular refers to, "officers and employees working in GDDC Limited". The circular does not say that it is not applicable to Badli workers.

( 4 ) MR. CLERK submitted that assuming without admitting that the circular is meant only for permanent officers and employees, it is violative of Article 14 as it does not cover badli workers. Mr. Clerk submitted that the action of the respondents, more particularly of respondents no. 1 and 2 of not offering benefits of VRS to all badli workers is violative of Article 14 inasmuch as the benefits of VRS are extended to four badli workers, whose names are set out in para 3 of the petition.

( 5 ) MR. CLERK made available certain circulars and documents on which reliance is placed. Mr. Clerk submitted that in Circular dated 8. 7. 1999, issued by the respondent no. 1, it has given a go by to the scheme declared by Govt. of Gujarat, Finance Department by its circular no. JNV/ 1097/ 413/ A dated 27. 11. 1997, a copy of which was placed on record by learned advocate Shri Patel for ready perusal of the Court. Mr. Clerk submitted that earlier when respondent no. 1 had invited applications by Circulars dated 9. 1. 1998, 15. 9. 1998 and 5. 1. 1999, the aforesaid Circular of the Govt. dated 27. 11. 1997 was referred to in the Circulars issued by respondent no. 1. In the present circular dated 8. 7. 1999, respondent no. 1 has not referred to the Circular dated 27. 11. 1997 of the Government meaning thereby that respondent no. 1 has given a go by to the policy of the Govt. declared by Circular dated 27. 11. 1997. Mr. Clerk pointed out that after the Circular dated 8. 7. 1999, respondent no. 1 invited applications by a circular dated 30. 11. 2000 bearing no. GDDC/ Adm/ 2000/ 1630. In that only circular dated 8. 7. 1999 is referred to and there is no reference to Govt. Circular dated 27. 11. 1997. Not only that respondent no. 1 has also not referred to another Govt. Circular dated 28. 7. 1999 which was issued by Finance Departmen