ORDER :

1. This appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 29.04.2022 passed by learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 2676/2021.

2. Heard learned advocate, Mr. H.S. Munshaw for the appellants, learned advocate, Mr. Dipak Dave for the respondent no. 1 and learned AGP Mr. Kurven Desai for the respondent no. 2.

3. Learned advocate, Mr. Munshaw submitted that the present appellants are the original petitioners, who have challenged the order dated 24.01.2020 passed by the Labour Court in Recovery Application No. C-2-102/2008, whereby the Labour Court directed the appellants-original petitioners to release the benefit of pension in favour of the respondent-workman.

4. It is submitted that the respondent-workman was offered work as daily wager in November, 1976 without following procedure of recruitment and he was offered work based on availability of the work and funds. It is submitted that the benefit of GR dated 17.10.1988 was extended to the respondent-workman on completion of 5 years on 01.11.2022 and, thereafter on completion of 10 years of service as daily wager on 01.04.2007, however, the respondent - workmen is not entitled to get the pensionary benefit. Learned advocate has mainly placed reliance upon the GR dated 24.03.2006 issued by the State Government, wherein it has been specifically stated that if the daily wager has completed ten years of continuous service, he is entitled to get pensionary benefit. In the present case, the respondent-workman is not entitled to get pensionary benefit as prayed for by him before the Labour Court in the recovery application, inspite of that, the Labour Court has granted such benefit to the respondent-workman. Learned advocate further submitted that learned Single Judge has also committed an error while placing reliance upon the decision rendered in case of Tribhovan Jerambhai vs. Deputy Executive Engineer, 1998 (2) GLH 1. Learned advocate, therefore, urged that this appeal be allowed and the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge be quashed and set aside.

5. On the other hand, learned advocate, Mr. Dipak Dave has opposed this appeal and mainly submitted that in identical matters filed by similarly situated workmen being Special Civil Application No. 12350/2016 and allied matters, learned Single Judge of this Court passed an order on 22.12.2016 and the petitions filed by the concerned workman were partly allowed and thereby direction was given by the learned Single Judge to grant pensionary benefits to the concerned workman. It is submitted that the State Government challenged the said order by filing Letters Patent Appeal No. 38/2016 and allied matters, however, the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.01.2018 dismissed the said appeal filed by the State of Gujarat. It is also contended that against the said order, the State of Gujarat preferred SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court being Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 45860/2018 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the said SLP vide order dated 04.01.2019. Learned advocate, Mr. Dave has produced on record copies of aforesaid orders. Learned advocate, therefore, urged that the issue involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the aforesaid decisions as ell as the decision rendered by this Court in case of Tribhovan Jerambhai (supra). Learned advocate, therefore, urged that no error is committed by learned Single Judge while dismissing the petition filed by the petitioners and, therefore, this appeal be dismissed.

6. Having heard learned advocates for the parties and having gone through the material placed on record, it would emerge that the respondent-workman was offered work as daily wager in November, 1976 and the benefit of GR dated 17.10.1988 was also given to the workman on completion of 5 years as well as 10 years of service. The Recovery Application filed by the respondent-workman was allowed by the Labour Court and the direction was given