VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
District Development Officer – Appellant
Versus
Pithadiya Vijaybhai Mahendrabhai – Respondent
ORDER :
VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.
1. This Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent challenging the order dated 19.09.2022 rendered by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Special Civil Application No.10916 of 2020.
2. Heard Mr.H.S. Munshaw, learned advocate for the appellant-original respondent No.2, Mr. J.V. Japee, learned advocate for the respondent Nos.1 to 18 original petitioners and Mr.Ronak Raval, learned AGP for respondent No.9- State of Gujarat.
3. Mr. Munshaw, learned advocate for the appellant mainly submits that all the original petitioners were appointed on compassionate ground as per the policy of the State Government. It is submitted that the appointment of the petitioners were on fixed salary basis for a period of five years and that to ad-hoc basis. On completion of five years of ad-hoc services, the present appellant has passed order for giving regular pay scale to the original petitioners. It is submitted that as regular pay scale was not granted to the petitioners, they have preferred captioned petition in which, the original petitioners had prayed that the respondent authority be directed to pass orders for giving the regular pay scale applicable to th
The legal principle established in the judgment is that the policy prevailing at the time of appointment governs the entitlement to pay scale, and the court may consider similar treatment given by th....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioners were entitled to compassionate appointment based on the Resolution dated 10.3.2000, and the court directed the respondents to ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment on compassionate basis was governed by the Resolution dated 10.3.2000, irrespective of the policy prevalent at the time of con....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of the petitioners on compassionate grounds was based on the Resolution dated 10.3.2000, and the subsequent policy dated 15.6.....
The main legal point established is that petitioners appointed on compassionate grounds are entitled to the regular scale of pay from their initial date of appointment based on relevant Government Re....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the respondent authorities must comply with the relevant circulars issued by the State Government in granting regular pay scale to employees a....
Compassionate appointments should align with substantive employment rights, and any delay in claims does not negate entitlements when based on continuing wrongs.
Court emphasized equity in treatment of compassionate appointments and limited retroactive benefits to three years from filing date.
Petitioners, appointed on compassionate grounds, are entitled to regular pay scales and benefits consistent with earlier court decisions, regardless of the delay in their applications.
The court established that similarly situated employees are entitled to the same benefits as previously determined in comparable cases, ensuring equity in compassionate appointments and rectifying pa....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.