IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 19677 of 2019 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV ==========================================================

1	Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2	To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3	Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4	Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any order made thereunder ?

==========================================================

ISHWARBHAI BHIKHABHAI PARMAR Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR VIJAY N RAVAL(2025) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR KURVEN DESAI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV Date : 01/08/2022

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Kurven Desai, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of Rule for the respondents.

NEUTRAL CITATION

undefined

respective parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing today.

3. By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for extension of the benefits of the GR dated 4.7.1973, by which Resolution, those who were on the nominal muster roll of the Public Works Department were to be brought on the Work Charge Establishment.

4. Mr. Raval, learned counsel for the petitioner would invite the Court’s attention to an order passed by this Court in SCA No.1681 of 2002 dated 25.4.2011 where the association – Gujarat Rajya Jaher Bandhkam Majoor Mandal had approached this Court for a prayer that they be granted the benefits of the Resolution dated 4.7.1973.

5. Considering the afÏdavit-in-reply filed by the State opposing the grant of such benefits where the Court extensively quoted the afÏdavit-in-reply, the Court held as

NEUTRAL CITATION

undefined

“14. In view of above orders passed by this Court, State Government was directed to take decision in response to representation which will be made by petitioners to State Government and thereafter,decision has been taken by State Government on 29.1.2002 through its Addl. Secretary R&B Department wherein after considering representation,it has been informed that in view of conferment of benefits vide Resolution dated 17.10.88,Government has cancelled GR dated 4.7.1973 to see that any anomaly is not created or arising. It has also been stated that from 31.3.1989, Government has imposed absolute ban on conversion of daily wagers into Work Charge and labourers are getting benefits as per Resolution dated 17.10.88 and Government has implemented judgment in SCA No. 4462 of 1987 and 600 of 1988 on a condition not to be cited as precedent. Said decision is challenged in present both petitions by petitioner union with further prayer to confer benefit of Work Charged employee which has already been extended in favour of members of petitioner union as per GR dated 4.7.1973 prior to cancellation of it by GR dated 5.1.1990, with effect from 27th December, 1999. Petitioners have also submitted that such benefits which were already extended in favour of members of petitioner union be considered as legal, valid and just and, therefore, no interference is called to revert members of petitioner union from Work Charged employees to daily rated employees. In both matters, short question to be considered by this Court is as under: Benefit has been extended in favour of members of petitioner union after deliberation made by ofÏcer concerned from Roads and Buildings Department page 73 and 74 in department's note dated 1st December, 1999 prepared by Superintending Engineer

NEUTRAL CITATION

undefined

helpers, after considering GR dated 4.7.1973 and also considering GR dated 5.1.1990, it has been recommended that these 22 w

Click Here to Read the rest of this document