Sonia Gokani, J.

1. Since this group of petitions raises the identical questions of facts and law, they are being decided by this common judgment.

2. The challenge in this group of petitions principally is to the inaction on the part of the respondents in not paying pension to the petitioners, who have retired after April 01, 1980 from the post of Readers and who are otherwise entitled to the General Provident Fund (for short, 'GPF') and pension as provided under the Government Resolution dated October 15, 1984 and, therefore, the present petitions. For the sake of convenience, the facts are taken from Special Civil Application No. 14953 of 2015, which in a capsulised form are as under:

3. The petitioner joined his services as Tutor Demonstrator in the Science College on April 10, 1970 on completion of due process of selection. He had applied for the post of Lecturer advertised by the Gujarat University and was, accordingly, appointed on June 15, 1982.

4. Pursuant to the advertisement of the Gujarat University for filling in the vacant posts of Readers in the School of Science, once again, he was required to undertake the entire selection process. After completion of the said de novo process of selection, he was initially appointed on probation period of two years vide order dated July 07, 1990. The appointment was given to him specifically mentioning that the GPF, Pension and other benefits are admissible.

5. It is averred by the petitioner that he had undergone the process of selection once again when he came to be appointed as a Professor on September 07, 1998. It is, thus, the say of the petitioner that he had joined the service after April 01, 1982 on due selection process. Therefore, the petitioner would be covered under Clauses 4 and 6 of the Government Resolution dated October 15, 1984, which is made effective with effect from April 01, 1982. It is further his say that his appointment as reader and Professor in the respondent-College is a new and fresh appointment approved by the State Government and, therefore, on the respective posts of Reader and Professor, as the appointment was made prior to April 01, 1982, this would amount to 'recruitment' and the pension scheme would automatically be effective in the case of the petitioner.

6. By way of the said Government Resolution dated October 15, 1984, a scheme was introduced for Teaching and non-Teaching Staff in Affiliated Colleges. It is also averred by the petitioner that this issue has been decided while dealing with Special Civil Application No. 29461 of 2007 on June 16, 2008, by this Court and, therefore also, the petitioner needs to be accorded the same treatment as has been given to the petitioners of the said petition.

6.1 The petitioner has sought to rely upon various authorities to substantiate his stand and eventually has sought for the following substantial reliefs:

"11(b) To quash and set aside the respondent's action and inaction in not considering the case of the petitioner for pension by passing appropriate orders declaring him to be entitled to receive pension and further be pleased to declare that the petitioner's recruitment and appointment as Reader and Professor with effect from 7.7.90 and 7.9.98 is fresh recruitment therefore, he is entitled to pension as per the provisions of G.R. and further be pleased to direct the respondent to grant pension to the petitioner forthwith by considering the service rendered by him by issuing writ in the nature of mandamus or certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction so deemed fit and proper.

(c) Be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to give benefits of GPF scheme by transferring account of applicant to GPF and further to give benefits of pension scheme under Resolution dated 15.10.1984 within 3 months from the date of order and further be pleased to direct the respondent authoritie