JUDGMENT :

G.B. Shah, J.

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

In this appeal the orders dated 11.5.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.6360 and 6361 of 2001 are challenged. As the disputes involved in these appeals are identical and the facts are also same, these appeals are disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The respondents-original petitioners were serving in Sasan Gir Forest Lodge owned by India Tourism Development Corporation-original respondent No.2. The respondent in LPA No.1307 of 2012, V.K. Dharia was appointed vide order dated 1.5.1980 to the post of Chowkidar and respondent in LPA No. 1308, Khamish Noor Mohmad Katiya was appointed to the post of Gardener in the Sasan Gir Forest. When the appellant took over the management from original respondent No.2, no option was given by the respondents and the services of all employees were continued and treated as continuous service. No fresh appointment orders were issued nor any interviews were held and the respondents were absorbed under the appellant-Tourism Corporation of Gujarat and their services were treated as continuous service which as resolved in the meeting of the Board of Directors of the appellant relying upon the relevant Government Order. The EPF and Gratuity of the respondents were also transferred under the appellant. It was by virtue of the respondents' services with respondent No.2- The India Tourism Development Corporation that the respondents were transferred and absorbed by the appellant. It appears that vide Resolution dated 9.3.2000 the appellant floated a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (for short, "VRS") and a date was fixed within which a person desirous of opting for VRS had to make such application. The respondents opted for VRS and filled in the requisite forms. As the response to the scheme of VRS was not satisfactory, vide communication dated 20.4.2000 the date for accepting the forms for VRS was extended. The increments during the services of the respondents were also given by stating that the services of the respondents were termed as continuous service. While giving retirement benefits to the respondents under the VRS scheme, the present appellant refused to take into consideration 5 years' service they had with the respondent No.2 on the ground that since the management of Sasan Gir Forest Lodge was taken over in 1985 and the employees were also absorbed in 1985, past services of 5 years' rendered by the respondents cannot be considered and be counted for the purpose of giving benefits under the VRS. The respondents employees sent a communication dated 26.4.2000 pointing out the relevant facts that the retirement benefits, gratuity etc. must be paid to them considering the original date of appointment and not from the date when the appellant took over the services of the respondents from the present respondent No.2. The respondents having learnt that their original date of appointment was not being counted for commuting the retirement benefits, applied on 24.4.2000 for withdrawing themselves from the VRS. The appellant informed the employees that they were entitled to get the retirement benefits as per the rules of the Government and they were treated as retired voluntarily w.e.f 30.4.2000 vide communication dated 30.4.2000. Though repeated representations were made, the appellant did not consider their case. Hence the respondents filed Special Civil Applications before the learned Single Judge and the learned Single Judge, after hearing the parties at length, by order dated 11.5.2012 allowed the petitions and the appellant was directed to give the retirement benefits to the respondents as if they were in service from 1980 onwards. This order is challenged by the appellant in these appeals.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned Single Judge has erred in allowing the petition without considering the fact that the respondents-employees were appointed as fresh appointees a