IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.S. SUPEHIA, MAUNA M. BHATT, JJ.
DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER – Appellant
Versus
PRATIK KANTILAL PATANVADIYA – Respondent
Letters Patent Appeal Nos. 702, 703, 704, 705 of 2024, Special Civil Application Nos. 13225, 13237, 13242, 13583 of 2023, Civil Application (For Stay) No. 1 of 2024
Decided On : 18-07-2024
Arrears - Employment - Various Sections - The court discussed the principles regarding the grant of arrears in employment cases, emphasizing the relevance of the date of filing of writ petitions and the limitation period for claims, ultimately restricting arrears to three years prior to the filing date.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants, employees appointed on fixed pay, sought regular pay-scale and arrears from their initial appointment date, while the State argued for a restriction to three years prior to the filing of writ petitions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the claims for arrears were subject to the principles of delay and laches, and that the relevant date for calculating arrears should be the date of filing of the writ petitions, not the date of appointment.
Issues: Whether the employees are entitled to arrears from their initial date of appointment or restricted to three years prior to the filing of their writ petitions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that arrears for service-related claims are typically restricted to three years before the filing of the writ petition, in line with established legal principles regarding delay and laches.
Result: The appeals are disposed of, granting arrears for three years prior to the filing of the respective writ petitions.
ORDER :
1. The present appeals are ADMITTED. Learned advocates appear and waive service of notice of admission on behalf of the respective respondents.
2. At the outset, learned advocate Ms. Krupali N. Bhatt, appearing for the appellants has submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court dated 11.07.2024 in Letters Patent Appeal No. 659 of 2024 and allied matters.
3. It appears that the present appeals were not listed along with the group of matters, which are decided by this Court vide order dated 11.07.2024.
4. In the order dated 11.07.2024, this Court has observed thus:
10. Both the rival parties have filed the captioned Letters Patent Appeals assailing the order passed by the learned Single Judges. So far as the issue of conferring the regular pay-scale from the initial date of appointment to the writ petitioners is concerned, the same is no more res integra and we do are not inclined to tinker with such directions.
11. In these group of LPAs, learned Single Judges have issued directions to grant arrears w.e.f. 01.01.2020. It is noticed by us that the appointments of the petitioners-respondent employees have been made in the year of 2004-2005. The writ petitioners have placed reliance on the order dated 07.10.2002 passed in Special Civil Application No. 1579 of 2002 to substantiate their claim. An averment is made that the writ petitioners of that writ petition was appointed on fixed pay in 1994 on compassionate appointment, and after the observations are made by this Court in the judgment dated 07.10.2002, he is appointed on regular pay-scale. On a perusal of the order dated 07.10.2002, we do not find any such directions issued by the High Court. However, it appears that the said petitioner is thereafter conferred the regular payscale. In fact, the policy of appointing the dependent of the deceased employee on compassionate appointment on fixed pay is introduced by the State Government vide Government Resolution dated 15.06.2004. All the writ petitioners, thus were appointed on fixed pay in the year 2004-2005 on fixed pay, and have filed the writ petitions claiming regular payscale after a long delay in the years 2019-2023.
12. The issue with regard to conferring the arrears either from 01.01.2020 or for 3 years from the date of filing of the writ petition, as declared by the Apex Court in the in the cases of Shiv Dass (supra) and Tarsemsingh (supra), was neither raised nor examined by the Coordinate Benches. The Division Bench in the order dated 03.10.2023 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No. 287 of 2023 has conferred the consequential benefits to the original petitioner - employees from the date of appointment, after directing the respondents to give them regular appointment in the regular pay-scale from the initial date of appointment. However, it is pertinent to note that subsequently, the Division Bench in the order dated 16.10.2023 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1293 of 2023 has upheld the decision of the learned Single Judge granting arrears from 01.01.2020. SLP (Civil) (Diary No).1024 of 2023 against judgment and order dated 05.09.2022 in LPA No. 1050 of 2022 in SCA No. 14642 of 2019 has been withdrawn by the District Development Officer on 24.05.2023, and SLP (Civil) Diary No. 30685 of 2023 against the judgment and order dated 19.04.2023 in LPA No. 464 of 2023 in SCA No. 10916 of 2020 has been dismissed in limine.
13. When a specific query was raised to the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties regarding fixation of the date 01.01.2020 for restricting the date of arrears; it is pointed out that for the first time in the judgment and order dated 18.04.2022 passed in group of writ petitions being Special Civil Application No. 14642 of 2019 and allied matters, the learned Single Judge has restricted arrears from 01.01.2020 since the writ petitions were
Asger Ibrahim Amin v. Life Insurance Corporation of India
Rushibhai Jagdishchandra Pathak vs. Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation
In employment-related claims, arrears are limited to three years before the filing of the writ petition, reflecting the principles of delay and laches.
Service-related claims can be enforced even after delays, limited to three years before filing due to continuing wrongs affecting entitlements.
The delay in filing service-related claims restricts entitlement to arrears to a maximum of three years prior to the filing of the writ petition, unless circumstances indicate a continuing wrong.
Claims for service-related arrears are generally limited to three years prior to the filing date of the petition, reflecting principles of delay and laches.
Compassionate appointments are substantive and entitled to regular pay-scale from the initial appointment date, with arrears limited to three years prior to filing due to delay.
The court upheld that employees appointed on compassionate grounds are entitled to be treated as regular employees from their appointment date, ensuring equal pay and benefits as dictated by establis....
Employees appointed on compassionate grounds are entitled to regular pay scale from initial appointment date, with any delays in claims restricted to three years prior to petition filing.
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....
Fixed-term compassionate appointments must be treated as regular positions from the date of appointment, granting appropriate pay-scale and benefits, with arrears limited to three years before filing....
The court affirmed that employees appointed on compassionate grounds are entitled to regular pay scales from the initial date of appointment, subject to a limit of three years for the payment of arre....
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.