IMPORTANT POINT
Retiral benefits must be calculated from the date of initial appointment, not from the date of regularization, as established by precedents.

JUDGMENT :

NIRZAR S. DESAI, J.

1. With the consent of the learned Advocates for the parties, this matter is taken-up for final hearing and disposal, today. Hence, RULE. Learned Advocate, Ms. Mandavia, waives service for the Respondents.

2. By way of this petition, the petitioners have prayed for a direction to the Respondent-authorities to recalculate their retiral benefits, including pension, from the date of their initial appointment and not from the date of their regularization in service, with a further direction to the Respondents to pay the arrears and grant the benefits to the petitioners along with interest, at the rate, which, this may Court deem fit, in the facts of this case.

3. The brief facts, leading to the filing of this petition, and as canvassed by learned Advocate, Ms. Dhruvi Desai, appearing for learned Advocate, Ms. Pandya, for the petitioners are as under;

All the petitioners came to be appointed by the Respondent-authorities, initially, as daily-wagers on different posts and on different dates, between the years 1984-1985, and the details whereof are produced vide a chart produced as Annexure-A to this petition, which reads thus;

3.1 It is the case of the petitioners that after the successful completion of 10 years’ of services on their respective posts, as daily wagers, they were given the benefit of GR dated 17.10.1988 in the year 1995. It is, further, the case of the petitioners that as per the chart produced herein above, on attaining the age of superannuation on different dates and in different years, the petitioners were paid retiral benefits, including pension, by taking into consideration the date of regularization of their services in the year 1995 and not from the date of their initial appointment, i.e. the year 1985.

3.2 Hence, the present petition is filed.

4. Learned Advocate, Ms. Desai, appearing for the petitioners submitted that the issue involved in this matter is squarely covered by the catena of decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court as well as of this Court, whereby, the view is taken that for the purpose of counting the retiral benefits, it is the date of initial entry in service or the initial appointment, which is required to be taken into consideration and not the date of regularization of services.

4.1 In support of her submission, learned Advocate, Ms. Desai, placed reliance on the following decisions;

(1) ‘Executive Engineer Panchayat (MAA & M.) Department & Another Vs. Samudabhai Jyotibhai Bhedi & Another’, reported in 2017 (4) GLR 2952;

(2) ‘State of Gujarat Vs. Ranabhai Ajmalbhai Harijan, since deceased through legal heirs’, Letters Patent Appeal No. 1518 of 2017, Decided On: 10.04.2018;

(3) ‘Karsanbhai Govabhai Vadher Vs. Gujarat Maritime Board’, Special Civil Application No. 1902 of 2020, Decided On: 30.03.2022;

(4) ‘Vijyaben Babubhai Lodhari W/d. Babubhai Lodhari Vs. Gujarat maritime Board’, Special Civil Application No. 11767 of 2020, Decided On: 14.06.2022;

4.2 By relying on the aforesaid decisions, learned Advocate, Ms. Desai, submitted that by way of the aforesaid decisions the learned Single Judge as well as the Division Bench of this Court have taken a view that the concerned petitioners in those matters, who had claimed the retiral benefits from the date of their initial appointment, were entitled to get the same from the date of their initial appointment and not from the date of their regularization in service.

4.3 It was, therefore, prayed that the present petitioners, whose case is identical to the case of the petitioners in the above referred decisions, may al