IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13144 of 2025 ==========================================================

NAVNIT CHAMPAKLAL VORA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR AR THACKER(888) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 SHIVANG A THACKER(7424) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MS DHRUTI PANDYA, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL Date : 07/10/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Shivang Thacker appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms.Dhruti Pandya appearing on behalf of the respondent – State.

2. The present petition is preferred with the following prayers:-

“(A) To admit and allow this petition.

(B) To issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order of direction, directing the respondents to pay to the petitioner his unpaid salary for the period from 8.8.2005 to 1.7.2008 alongwith interest @ 9% p.a.

thereon.

(C) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the above Special Civil Application, to direct respondents to pay to the petitioner his unpaid salary for the period from 8.8.2005 to 1.7.2008 alongwith interest @ 12% p.a. thereon.

(D) The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other appropriate relief as the nature circumstances of the case may require.

(E) To award the cost of this petition.”

3. It would appear that the present petitioner had preferred Special Civil Application No.5229/2008 inter alia for the very selfsame prayers and whereas, vide an order dated 03.09.2021, a learned Coordinate Bench of this Court had disposed of the petition on the ground that the petition does not survive more particularly even the terminal benefits having already been paid to the petitioner.

3.1. It is the case of the petitioner that he is entitled for unpaid salary from the period from 08.08.2005 to 01.07.2008 along with interest thereupon as observed hereinabove. While the said prayers were part of the said earlier writ petition, the same had been disposed of by a learned Coordinate Bench vide order referred to hereinabove. It would further appear that the petitioner had challenged the said decision dated 03.09.2021 by preferring Letters Patent Appeal No.873/2021 and vide an order dated 08.10.2021 the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court had recorded the request of the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner / appellant for permission to withdraw the Letters Patent Appeal with liberty to approach the learned Single Judge to seek review of the order dated 03.09.2021.

3.2. It also appears that pursuant to the liberty granted, the petitioner had approached the learned Coordinate Bench for review vide Review Application No.01/2021 and whereas, vide an order dated 14.07.2023, the learned Coordinate Bench had observed as thus:-

“If any remedy is available to the petitioner to explore against any other grievance, it is open for the petitioner to do so. The present Misc. Civil Application for review is rejected.”

4. Learned advocate Mr.Thacker on behalf of the petitioner would submit that it is basis such observations that the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.

5. To this Court, it would appear that such a contention cannot be accepted. To this Court, it would appear that while the petitioner approached this Court with a substantive writ petition inter alia for the very selfsame prayers and whereas, upon the same being disposed of as having become infructuous, the petitioner having approached the Hon’ble Division Bench and having withdrawn the Letters Patent Appeal had approached the learned Coordinate Bench for review of the original order. The liberty, as observed by the learned Coordinate Bench, does not in any manner whatsoever to this Court mean that