Part-time employees must work a minimum of four hours to qualify for wage benefits under the Circular dated 16.07.2019; the court upheld the interpretation of eligibility based on this criterion.

ORDER :

L.S. PIRZADA, J.

1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Pradip J. Patel appearing for the appellant, learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms.Shruti Dhruve appearing for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned advocate Ms.Ashlesha M. Patel appearing for the respondent Nos.3 to 5.

2. The present appeal is filed under Clause – 15 of the Letters Patent, 1865 against the Order dated 25.09.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in the captioned writ petition, wherein the learned Single Judge had directed the present respondent No.2 – Finance Department to examine the case of the original petitioners by calling for necessary details of all the petitioners from the concerned department and thereafter, to examine the case of each petitioner with regard to their service conditions and, in case there is no objection, the respondent Nos.3 to 5 - original petitioners be extended the benefits under the Circular dated 16.07.2019.

3. ADMIT. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms.Shruti Dhruve and learned advocate Ms.Ashlesha M. Patel waive service of notice of admission for and on behalf of the respective respondents.

4. Learned advocate Mr.Pradip J. Patel appearing for the appellant submitted that the aforesaid Circular dated 16.07.2019 was considered by the Division Bench in the group of matters being Letters Patent Appeals No.724 of 2023 and allied matters and by the judgment dated 11.08.2023, the Division Bench has held that the part-time employees, who were working for less than four hours, are not entitled to the pay-scale as conferred by the Government Resolution dated 16.07.2019. It is submitted that though the respondent Nos.3 to 5 - original petitioners are working for four hours, they are not entitled to the benefits arising from the Circular dated 16.07.2019, as the aforesaid Circular mentions that only the part time employees who were working for more than four hours are entitled to such benefits. Thus, it is urged that the Order passed by the learned Single Judge may be quashed and set aside.

5. In response to the aforesaid submissions, learned advocate advocate Ms.Ashlesha M. Patel appearing for the respondent Nos.3 to 5 - original petitioners has submitted that the order passed by the learned Single Judge may not be interfered with as the same aligns with the Circular dated 16.07.2019 and since the appellant has not disputed that the respondent Nos.3 to 5 are not working less than four hours, they are entitled to the benefits of pay as per the Circular dated 16.07.2019.

6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms.Shruti Dhruve submitted that the expression used in the Circular dated 16.07.2019, would mean that the part-time employees have to complete minimum four hours of work in order to get themselves or himself entitled for the minimum wages of Rs.14,800/-.

7. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.

8. It is not in dispute and in fact, admitted by the appellant that the respondent Nos.3 to 5 - original petitioners were working for four hours as a part-timer. Learned Single Judge in paragraph Nos.5 and 6 of the impugned Order dated 25.09.2025 has held as follows:-

“5. In the considered opinion of this Court, the present petition can be disposed of with a direction to the respondent-Finance Department to examine the cases of the present petitioners with regard to extending the benefits of the resolution dated 16.07.2019.

6. The respondent-Finance Department is directed to call for necessary details of all the petitioners from the concerned departments within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the present order. The concerned departments are also directed to cooperate and for