JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Vaibhav A. Vyas for the petitioner and learned AGP Mr. Sahil Trivedi for the respondent-State.

2. Issue Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP Ms. Trivedi waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

3. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought for the following prayers :

"8. The petitioner respectfully prays that, on the basis of the facts and circumstances as mentioned hereinabove and which may be urged at the time of hearing, the Honourable Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent authorities and may be pleased to :-

(A) Direct the respondent authorities to grant the benefit of compensation pension to the petitioner and consequently direct the respondent authorities to make payment of retirement dues such as pension, gratuity, leave encashment, etc. to the petitioner, with interest from the date of her entitlement, or in the alternative

(B) Direct the respondent authorities to grant the benefit of retiring pension to the petitioner by treating the petitioner as having retired voluntarily from service on completion of more than 20 years of qualifying service and consequently direct the respondent authorities to make payment of the retirement dues such as pension, gratuity, leave encashment, etc., to the petitioner.

(C) Pending admission and final disposal of this petition Honourable Court may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to make payment or provisional pension and gratuity to the petitioner.

(D) Award the cost of this petition, and

(E) Grant any other relief or pass any other order which the Honourable Court may consider as just and proper in facts and circumstances of the case."

4. It would appear that the petitioner had completed approximately 23 years of service with the respondent-State, as an ad-hoc lecturer and since the services of the petitioner were discontinued, the petitioner by way of this petition has claimed for payment of compensation pension under Rule 44 of the Gujarat Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2002 (for short "Rules 2002"). Compensation Pension which is envisaged under Rule 44(4) of the Rules 2002 envisages a pension granted to a Government employee who is discharged from Government service other than on medical certificate and for no fault of his own, before attaining the age of superannuation.

5. Learned Advocate Mr. Vyas for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had been originally appointed as lecturer with the K.D. Polytechnics, Patan on 02.09.1997 after a selection process and whereas the petitioner had continued on the said position till she was posted at the R.C. Technical Institute, Ahmedabad where she took over from 31.01.2011 and continued there till her services were terminated and thereafter the petitioner came to be re-appointed on 24.06.2011 and till 25.06.2015, the petitioner had served at Government Polytechnic, Palanpur, and whereas later the petitioner had continued as lecturer in the Government Polytechnic, Himatnagar till 08.03.2021 when her services were discharged. It would appear that the petitioner had continued on ad-hoc basis on the above post and put in approximately 23 years of service and whereas while the petitioner does not question her termination etc., the petitioner has by way of this petition, according to learned Advocate Mr. Vyas, sought for grant of compensation pension as referred to hereinabove. Learned Advocate would submit that as such, the issue in question is no more res integra in view of the law laid down by a learned Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 07.05.2019 in Special Civil Application No. 19042 of 2017, whereby the learned Coordinate Bench while interpreting Rule 25 of the Rules, 2002 had inter alia observed that all services including service rendered in ad-hoc capacity whether temporary or permanent, whether interrupted or continuous, would be treated as qualifying service for