JUDGMENT :

1. RULE returnable forthwith. Ms.Surbhi Bhati learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent State.

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

3. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the relief sought for by the petitioner is to count the length of service preceding the date of regularization as the initial date for the purposes of extending the benefits of retirement and fixation of pension.

4. Mr.Joshi would rely on the order passed by this Court dated 29.03.2022 in Special Civil application No.944 of 2022. The said order reads as under:

“1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule for the respondent-State.

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

3. Heard Mr. V. K. Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms. Surbhi Bhati, learned AGP for the respondent-State.

4. By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the action of the respondents in not making full payment of pensionary benefits to them by counting their entire length of service from the date of joining till the date of retirement as illegal. They also have prayed for benefits of leave encashment.

5. The case of the petitioners is that while granting pensionary benefits to the petitioners, their date for the purposes of counting service is taken from the date when they completed ten years of service for the purposes of the entitlement as per GR dated 17.10.1988. Service details of each of the petitioners are placed on record which indicate that for the purposes of granting pension, their initial date of appointment is not considered.

6. Mr. V. K. Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioners would rely on an order passed in similar matter by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Special Civil Application No.11086 of 2019 dated 21.8.2019. He further requested this Court to pass a similar order in this matter too. The order dated 21.8.2019 reads as under:

“Heard learned advocate Mr. Dipak Dave for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Krina Calla for the respondent state.

2. The following are the prayers made in this petition.

“(i) to hold and declare that action on part of the respondents in not making full payment of pensionary benefits to the petitioner by counting their entire length of service from date of joining till date of retirement as illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and further be pleased to direct the respondents to fix the pension of the petitioner by counting his service from date of joining until the date of retirement and fix the pension accordingly;

(ii) to hold and declare that petitioner is entitled to all other retiral benefits including benefit of leave encashment and be pleased to further direct the respondents to pay amount of leave encashment of leave standing in the account of the petitioner;

(iii) to direct the respondents to pay difference of pensionary benefits, gratuity amount and leave encashment with 18% interest from the date when it felt due;”

3. The petitioner served as Rojamdar under the office of Respondent no.2 Executive Engineer, Ahmedabad from 21.4.1985 continuously and uninterruptedly as provided under section 25B of the Industrial Disputes Act. The petitioner was extended the benefits of state government Resolution dated 17.10.1988.

3.1 The grievance of the petitioner is that while counting the pensionary benefits for him, his services has been continued from the date he was made permanent under the Resolution dated 17.10.1988, however, in the process, the initial years of service for 10 years were excluded and not counted. It is the grievance that gratuity amount was also paid on the basis of such erroneous calculation. It is the further grievance that though the petitioner was entitled, he was not to avail 300 days leaves n