SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Guj) 1947

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
NIKHIL S. KARIEL, J.
Geetaben Vishnubhai Prajapati - Petitioner 
Versus 
State Of Gujarat & Ors. – Respondents
R/Special Civil Application No. 12491 of 2025 With R/Special Civil Application No. 12496 of 2025
Decided On : 09-09-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ms Harshal N Pandya.
For the Respondents: Ms. Nirali Sarda, AGP.

The court affirmed the right of petitioners, appointed on compassionate grounds, to be considered for regular pay-scale from their initial appointment date, with restrictions on arrears limited to three years prior to filing.

Headnote:(A) Government Resolution dated 15.06.2004 - Appointment on compassionate basis - The petitioners were entitled to modified appointment orders treating their date of appointment as that of regular pay-scale with arrears for three years prior to filing of writ petitions. (Paras 6, 9)

(B) Delay and laches - The court held that delay should not bar the claim for regular appointment and benefits if similar requests were granted to identically situated individuals. (Paras 11.6, 11.8)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners were appointed on fixed pay under the Government Resolution dated 15.06.2004 and sought regularization in pay-scale based on previous court decisions.

Findings of Court:
The court confirmed entitlement to modified appointments and directed payment of arrears for three years prior to petition filing, treating prior service as notional.

Issues: The primary issues centered on the similarity of the petitioners’ case to previous decisions and the applicability of delay to their claims.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed the principle that claims for compassionate appointment should not be rejected due to delay when similarly situated cases have been addressed favorably.

Result: Both petitions allowed, with directions for compliance within four months.

Table of Content
1. hearing and service of rule. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. petition covered by prior decision. (Para 4 , 5)
3. details of petitioners’ appointment. (Para 6 , 7)
4. entitlement to similar benefits. (Para 8 , 9)
5. past decisions affecting current case. (Para 10 , 11)
6. final order and directions. (Para 12)

ORDER :

NIKHIL S. KARIEL, J.

1. Heard learned Advocate Ms. Harshal N. Pandya for the petitioners and learned AGP Ms. Nirali Sarda for the respondents in both the petitions.

2. Issue Rule. Learned AGP waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondents.

3. Since a common issue has been raised in both the writ petitions, with the consent of the parties, both the petitions are taken up for final hearing together.

4. At the outset, learned advocate for the petitioners would submit that the issue raised in these petitions is covered by a decision of this Court in Special Civil Application No.10738 of 2020 and allied matters dated 14.03.2024 and whereas it is submitted that the said decision with a modification had been confirmed by the Division Bench. It is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioners that since the petitioners are similarly situated to the petitioners of the above writ petitions, the same benefit as modified by the Division Bench, may be accorded to the present petitioners.

5. Learned AGP would not dispute the proposition as having been submitted by learned advocate for the petitioners.

6. It would appear that the petitioners before this Court, had been appointed on compassionate basis in terms of Government Resolution dated 15.06.2004, which prescribed the appointments on fixed pay on Ad- hoc basis for a period of 5 years and upon the petitioners having satisfactorily completed the period prescribed, the petitioners were to be absorbed in either Class III or the Class IV posts, as the case may be. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners had been wrongly appointed on fixed pay on fixed term basis and whereas it is in this context that the persons identically situated to the petitioners, had approached this Court by preferring the writ petitions referred to hereinabove. It would appear that this Court, vide judgment dated 14.03.2024 having relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as of this Court, had allowed the writ petitions directing the respondents to issue modified appointment orders to the petitioners, whereby the period from date of appointment of the petitioners would be treated as a regular pay-scale. This Court had further directed the respondents to pay to the petitioners all consequential benefits, which the petitioners would be entitled to upon the change in the date of the appointment orders, including arrears of benefits w.e.f. 01.01.2020. The respondents were directed to complete the exercise within a period of 4 months from the date of the order.

7. It would appear that the State as well as some of the District Panchayats had preferred Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment of this Court vide Letters Patent Appeal No.659 of 2024 and allied matters and whereas the Division Bench vide common oral order dated 11.07.2024 had inter alia modified the said decision to the extent that the arrears, which those petitioners would be entitled to, would be restricted to a period of three years prior to date of filing of the writ petitions. The Division Bench has further clarified that the Division Bench had not disturbed the decision with regard to conferment of the regular pay-scale from initial date of appointment etc. as ordered by this Court.

8. Considering such a situation, more particularly since there is no dispute as regards the fact that the petitioners herein are identically situated to the petitioners of the group of petitions referred to hereinabove, the benefits as the petitioners of the above writ petitions had been conferred with, are required to be granted to the petitioners herein.

9. Having regard to the such a position, at the outset, this Court se

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top