IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2352 of 2022 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL ==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No ✓

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

SANJA UKABHAI GANGARAMBHAI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR BHARAT T RAO(697) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MS ASMITA V PATEL(5356) for the Respondent(s) No. 4,5 MR MITUL GAUTAM, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL Date : 13/03/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Heard learned advocate Mr.B.T.Rao on behalf of the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Mitul Gautam on behalf of the respondent – State and learned advocate Ms.Asmita Patel on behalf of the respondents no.4 and 5.

2. By way of this petition, the petitioner had sought for the following prayers:-

“(A) To issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing ans setting aside the charge-sheet dated 8.2.2006 issued by respondent no.4 since the respondents have not completed the departmental inquiry even after lapse of more than 15 years and further be pleased to direct the respondents to drop the departmental inquiry and pay to the petitioner all the dues and retiral dues considering petitioner on duty alongwith all consequential benefits alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. thereon from the date of suspension of petitioner till realisation.

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

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

3. It is the case of the petitioner that he had been appointed as an Educational Supervisor, Class-III in the year 1979 with the Municipal School Board, Rajkot managed by the Municipal Commissioner and while he was working as such, in the year 2005, he had made some application against the then administrative officer of the Municipal School Board, Rajkot.

3.1. It is the case of the petitioner that for the purpose of wrecking vengeance against the petitioner, the administrative officer had gotten up certain complaints against the petitioner and whereas, vide an order dated 23.12.2025 the petitioner had been suspended and whereas, it appears that serious allegations were concerned, while an FIR has been filed by the administrative officer in the year 2005, neither the FIR nor does the charge-sheet which had been filed subsequent to the investigation arraigning the petitioner as an accused.

3.2. It appears that thereafter, a departmental charge-sheet had been issued to the petitioner on 08.02.2006 and whereas, it is the case of the petitioner that basis the charge-sheet, the pension and other retiral benefits, which the petitioner would be entitled to, have not been fully paid. It also appears that in the interregnum, since the respondents were not completing inquiry, appropriate monetary relief had not been paid to the petitioner, hence, the petitioner had approached this Court on couple of occasions and pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, substantial rerial benefits came to be passed on to the present petitioner.

3.3. It would appear in this regard that while the charge- sheet had been issued upon the petitioner in the year 2006 and whereas, it is not the case of the respondents that the petitioner was in any way responsible for the inquiry not concluding till date and whereas, under such circumstances, it is requested by the petitioner that the impugned charge-sheet may be set aside and all the benefits, as if the order of the charge-sheet had never been passed at all, should be passed on to the present petitioner.

3.4. On the other hand, the case of the respondent – Corporation being that since the public money is involved, the