J.B. Pardiwala, J.

1. Since the issues raised in both the captioned writ applications are interconnected and also more or less the same, those were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

2. In both the writ applications, the writ applicants, retired employees of the Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Limited, have raised issues as regards their retiral benefits. The writ applicant of the Special Civil Application No. 2934 of 2008 had joined the services of the erstwhile Gujarat Electricity Board on 23rd February 1973 as the 'Junior Assistant'. Whereas, the writ applicant of the Special Civil Application No. 4098 of 2008 had joined the services of the erstwhile Gujarat Electricity Board (for short, 'the G.E.B.') in April 1980 as a 'Junior Engineer'.

3. At the time of the filing of the two writ applications, the writ applicant, namely, Shri R.B. Patel was serving as the 'Deputy Superintendent' in the Accounts Branch of the G.E.B. Whereas the writ applicant Shri Babubhai Ishwarlal Patel was serving as the 'Deputy Engineer' in the G.E.B.

4. A criminal complaint came to be filed by one Mr. Manilal Patel, the proprietor of M/s. Shriram Industries against both the writ applicants herein for the offence punishable under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

5. The prosecution instituted against both the writ applicants culminated in the A.C.B. Case No. 2 of 1989. The A.C.B. Case No. 2 of 1989 was tried by the Special Judge, Mehsana, and by judgment and order dated 9th September 1991, both the writ applicants herein were held guilty of the charge and were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 7read with Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Both the writ applicants were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years' and fine of Rs. 1,000/- each. As both the writ applicants came to be convicted and sentenced to undergo two years' of rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, the show cause notices were issued upon both dated 27th November 1991 calling upon them to show cause as to why they should not be dismissed from service. The two writ applicants filed their respective replies to the said show cause notice, and ultimately, by order dated 23rd January 1992, both the writ applicants came to be dismissed from the service.

6. On being convicted, both the writ applicants preferred the Criminal Appeals Nos. 711 of 1991 and 722 of 1991 respectively before this Court. At this stage, it may not be out of place to state that the criminal prosecution was against in all three persons including the two writ applicants herein. The third accused was not a public servant, but he happens to be the brother of the writ applicant Babubhai Ishwarlal Patel. The charge against the original accused No. 3 was one of abetting the commission of the offence punishable under Section 12 of the Act 1988.

7. Both the criminal appeals were heard and allowed by this Court. By judgment and order dated 12th December 2006, both the writ applicants herein as well as the third accused were ordered to be acquitted. The operative part of the order passed by this Court in a common judgment allowing both the appeals reads as under:

"For the reasons recorded in the judgment, the aforesaid both the appeals are hereby allowed. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 09 September, 1991, passed by the learned Special Judge, Mehsana, in Special ACB Case No. 2 of 1989, is hereby quashed and set aside. The accused of both the appeals are ordered to be acquitted from the charges levelled against them in respect of the offence in question. The orig. accused Nos. 1 and 3 are given benefit of doubt as there is no sufficient evidence to show that the amount accepted by the orig. accused No. 3 at the instance of orig. accused No. 1 was the acceptance of amount of bribe or illegal gratification, and the orig. accused No. 2 is given clean acquittal.

All the three accused are