JUDGMENT :

Biren Vaishnav, J.

1. RULE returnable forthwith. Mr. Kurven Desai, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of Rule for the respondent-State as well as Mr. Alkesh N. Shah, learned advocate waives service of notice of Rule for the concerned respondent No. 2-Nigam.

2. With the consent of the learned counsels for the respective parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing today.

3. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the prayer of the petitioner is to extend the benefits of the GR dated 17.10.1988 with effect from 16.4.1995 to 25.7.2003 in the pay scale of Rs. 950-1500 and revised pay scale corresponding thereto from 26.7.2003 to 9.1.2017 and from 10.1.2017 till date with 100% difference of salary.

4. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed on 16.4.1990 as Daily Wager Driver by the Superintending Engineer, Sardar Sarovar Saurashtra Branch Canal Circle-1, Surendranagar. On his services being terminated on 11.12.1990, a dispute was raised in reference (LCS) No. 57/1991. By an award dated 30.7.1993, the labour Court directed reinstatement with continuity of service and 50% of back wages. On a challenge to the award by the respondent No. 2-Nigam, by a judgment and order dated 26.8.1997, the petition was dismissed. The petitioner was reinstated on 21.8.1997. The petitioner had given legal notice on 21.9.1998 sought for the benefits of Resolution of 17.10.1988. Accordingly, a proposal was sent by the respondent for extending the benefits of Resolution. The petitioner had raised an industrial dispute claiming regularization before the labour Court, Surendranagar. Pending the dispute, the petitioner's services were again terminated by an order dated 25.7.2003, for which, the petitioner filed a complaint No. 2/2003. The reference/complaint was rejected against which the petitioner filed SCA No. 17955/2014. The labour Court, by an award dated 29.9.2011 in complaint No. 2/2003 directed the Nigam to reinstate the petitioner with 50% back wages. In the main award namely; Reference (LCD) No. 6/2003, the petitioner's claim for regularization was refused. Aggrieved by these orders, the petition filed SCA No. 17995/2014 and a Nigam filed SCA No. 20/2013. Both these petitions were heard together and by common order dated 9.1.2017 with regard to regularization directed the petitioner to make a representation to the authorities, as far as the Nigam's petition challenging reinstatement, the petition was dismissed.

5. It is apparent from the proposal made by the Corporation-Nigam that for the first time, the petitioner was appointed on 16.4.1990 and a representation being made for granting the benefits of Resolution dated 17.10.1988, his request has been rejected by a communication dated 1.11.2018 on the ground that his appointment is post of Resolution dated 17.10.1988.

6. Mr. Alkesh Shah, learned counsel for the Nigam would draw the attention of the Court to the affidavit-in-reply filed by a Nigam and submit that while counting from the date of joining for pension, because of the GR dated 17.10.1988, particularly, para 2 thereof Daily Wager will get a fix pay after five years service under Section 25(B) of the Industrial Disputes Act and the running scale after ten years of service. The department has no power to go beyond the Government Resolution.

7. Considering the submissions made by the learned advocates for the respective parties and considering the fact that has admittedly brought out on record that similarly situated employees who were appointed post 1990 i.e. in the year 1991 have been granted the benefits of Resolution dated 17.10.1988 on the basis of his appointment on 16.4.1990 even if it is post 17.10.1988.

8. This Court in SCA No. 7531/2018 in an oral order dated 20.8.2019 considering the decision of Kutch District Panchayat v. Mangalbhai K. Rabari decided as per judgment dated 8.10.2014, in turn confirmed in LPA No. 1381 of 2015 decided on 4.1.2016 has held as unde