IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI, J.
GNANESHWARY D. SHAH – Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
Special Civil Application No. 17169 of 2016
Decided On : 03-10-2024
JUDGMENT :
VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI, J.
1. Heard Mr. Gnaneshwary D. Shah, learned party-in-person and Ms. Suman J. Motla, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
2. By way of preferring the present Petition, petitioner herein challenges the order dated 15.09.2016 passed by the respondent no. 3, cancelling the senior scale of the petitioner with retrospective effect, from the date of entitlement of senior paygrade, since 22.11.1999. By way of the amendment, petitioner herein has challenged the consequential order dated 07.10.2016 passed by the respondent no. 4, pursuant to the impugned order dated 15.09.2016, wherein, by the said order, the respondent no. 4 has directed the accounts department to reduce the pay of the petitioner, w.e.f. 22.11.1999 and calculate the same, whereby, the respondent no. 4 has removed/demoted the petitioner from in-charge Head of the Department and appointed one Mr. B.J. Panchal, as Head of the Department, with immediate effect, that too, in anticipation, that the respondent no. 2 would pass a similar order in future.
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned orders as referred above, the same having been passed after more than 18 years, after the confidential report, is vitiated, on the ground of delay and latches and in view thereof, the same are required to be quashed and set aside.
4. By way of the present Petition, petitioner herein has prayed for the following reliefs:
(A-1) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of Certiorari and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned Orders dated 07.10.2016 [Annexure-A/1(Colly.)] as being arbitrary, illegal, violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to provisions of law.
(B) Pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to stay the operation and implementation of the impugned order dated 15.09.2016 and direct Respondent Authorities to refrain from undertaking any further steps pursuant to the said impugned order dated 15.09.2016 including any steps towards recovery of any so called dues from the petitioner.
(B-1) Pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, Your Lordship may be pleased to stay the operation and implementation of the impugned Orders dated 07.10.2016 [Annexure-A/1(Colly.)] and direct Respondent Authorities to refrain from undertaking any further steps pursuant to the said impugned Orders dated 07.10.2016 including any steps towards recovery of any so called dues from the Petitioner.
(C) An ex-parte ad-interim relief in terms of prayer (B) may kindly be granted.
(C-1) An ex-parte ad-interim relief in terms of prayer (B/1) may kindly be granted.
(D) Your Lordships may be pleased to award the costs of the petition to the petitioner.
(E) Pass such other and further order or orders as may be thought fit in the interest of justice.”
5.1. Briefly stated that, the undisputed facts are such that, the petitioner herein came to be appointed on ad-hoc basis in the year 1990 on the post of Lecturer in Government Polytechnic College in Plastic department. The services of the petitioner came to be regularized on 22.11.1993. The petitioner came to be granted senior scale of Rs. 1000-325-15200, which came to be approved, w.e.f. 22.11.1999, by order dated 21.11.2003 (Page-49). The petitioner was granted selection grade, which came to be approved and granted to the petitioner, w.e.f. 22.11.2004, as per the order dated 01.07.2006 (Page-53).
5.2. That vide order dated 15.09.2016, the senior scale and selection grade of the petitioner was cancelled/rejected, d
The cancellation of a senior scale and selection grade after significant delay and without prior communication of adverse remarks violates principles of natural justice.
Point of Law : Term “are exempted” used in the notification itself suggest that the benefits thereof would be applicable to the incumbents with requisite M.Phil degree serving as Lecturers though wit....
The main legal point established is the entitlement of the petitioner to arrears from the correct date of completion of refresher courses as per UGC Regulations, 2000, and the finality of court order....
The court ruled that a reduction in pay without the Executive Committee's approval is invalid, emphasizing the necessity of following proper authority and procedure in employment matters.
The refusal to accept a transfer does not negate entitlement to a higher pay scale after the requisite service period, especially when the posts are equivalent.
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.