Reserved On : 03/02/2026 Pronounced On : 16/02/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11084 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11085 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11087 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11088 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11089 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11090 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11871 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11872 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11873 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11874 of 2013 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT ==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No ✓

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

BHAGWAN DAYALBHAI WAGHELA Versus GUJARAT MARITIME BOARD ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR. RISHABH ACHARYA WITH MS HARSHAL N PANDYA(3141) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR. KANUBHAI M. PATEL, SR. ADVOCATE WITH MS. DHARMISHTA RAVAL WITH MR HAMESH C NAIDU(5335) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT

COMMON CAV JUDGMENT

1. Since all the captioned batch of petitioners are raising common issue, i.e., non-grant of appropriate higher pay scale by the respondent to the petitioner and, therefore, at the request of learned advocates for the respective parties, the matters are heard and decided together by way of this common CAV Judgment. For the sake of convenience, Special Civil Application No. 11084 of 2013 is considered as lead matter and the facts and prayers made therein are taken.

2. Heard Mr. Rishabh Acharya, learned advocate with Ms. Harshal N. Pandya, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Kanubhai M. Patel, learned Senior Advocate with Ms. Dharmishta Raval, learned advocate with Mr. Hamesh C. Naidu, learned advocate for the respondent, at length.

3. The present writ petition is filed under Articles 14, 16, and 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking following reliefs:

“(A) quash and set aside the impugned decision dated 24.4.2013, Annexure-A to the petition, and (B) direct the authorities of the respondent Board to grant the first higher grade scale of Rs. 4000-6000 to the petitioner instead of Rs. 2650-4000 w.e.f. 26.9.2002, with all consequential benefits including revision of pay, in light of the judgment and order dated 15.6.2010 of this Honourable Court as confirmed by the Honourable the Division Bench vide judgment and order dated 10.5.2011 and the Honourable the Supreme Court vide order dated 27.1.2012, and (C) further be pleased to direct the respondent authority to pay arrears to the petitioner flowing from the above prayer clause with interest at the rate at which other similarly situated employees are granted interest by this Honourable Court, and (D) award the exemplary cost of this petition, and (E) pending admission and final disposal of this petition, the Honourable Court may be pleased to direct the respondent authority to calculate and fix the pay in the pay-scale Rs. 4000- 6000 from the date on which the higher grade scale is due and payable to the petitioner, and/or F) grant any other relief or pass any other order which the Honourable Court may consider as just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

4. BRIEF FACTS

4.1 The petitioner has been working in the respondent- board as Khalasi since the year 1993. Upon completion of nine years of service to the post of Khalasi, the petitioner was offered higher pay scale of Rs. 2650-4000 as scale of pay of the next promotional post by the respondent, i.e., Assistant Tradesman. The necessary order in this regard was passed on 23.03.2006 by granting w.e.f. 26.09.2002.

4.2 The petitioner had raised the objection in regard to non-granting of higher pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000, which according to him scale of pay of the