JUDGMENT :

MAULIK J.SHELAT, J.

1. Heard Mr. Mukesh H. Rathod, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Kirit Patel, learned advocate for Mr. H.S. Munshaw, learned advocate for the respondent No. 4.

2. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Patel, learned advocate for Mr. Munshaw, learned advocate for the respondent No. 4 waives service of rule on behalf of respondent No. 4.

3. With the consent of learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for hearing.

4. The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:

“A. YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to allow and admit the present petition.

B. This Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to quashed and set aside the order dated. 12.10.2017 passed by the Executive Engineer, Morbi (Annexure B) to this petition as it is illegal, unjust and contrary to the settle law in the interest of justice.

C. This Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to issue an order, writ in the nature of mandamus and/or certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or directions for to direct the Respondent Authorities to grant the benefits flowing from Govt. Resolution dated. 17.10.1988 i.e. Pay Scale, Dearness Allowance, GPF, Gratuity, Earned Leave, Leave Encashment, Pension in favour of the petitioner in the interest of justice.

D. Pending admission and final disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents herein not to change service condition of the present petitioner.

E. Any other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

SHORT FACTS:

5. The petitioner was appointed as a daily wager by the respondent – Gujarat Water Supply & Sewerage Board (hereinafter referred to as the “Board”) on 01.01.1994 and terminated his service on 01.02.1996. At that point of time, the petitioner was working for eight hours a day.

5.1. The petitioners appears to have approached the Labour Court, Rajkot by way of Reference (LCR) No. 47/1998 which came to be allowed in favour of the petitioner on 22.03.2006. The Board appears to have challenged the said award before this Court by way of writ petition being Special Civil Application No. 28800 of 2007 which came to be dismissed on 18.01.2008.

5.2. The Board carried the matter further before the Division Bench by way of Letters Patent Appeal No. 379 of 2009 and the same was also dismissed on 13.11.2009. Finally, the petitioner was reinstated in service by the Board w.e.f. 15.01.2010.

5.3. While serving in the Board, the petitioner met with a serious accident on 10.01.2011 and due to such accident, he lost his both legs and became disabled to work as a daily wager.

5.4. Upon intervention of the Commissioner of Disable Persons, Gandhinagar, the petitioner was relocated by the Board and assigned the table work vide its order dated 23.10.2013. Since the petitioner was not granted the benefit of Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988, the petitioner served legal notice to the Board on 06.10.2015 which was replied by the Board through its lawyer on 03.11.2015. Therefore, the petitioner approached this Court by way of writ petition being Special Civil Application No. 16732 of 2016, wherein the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide its order dated 05.10.2016 directed the respondents to examine and consider the case of the petitioner for the purpose of granting the benefit available under the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 keeping in mind the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Gujarat vs. P.W.D. Employees Union [(2013) 12 SCC 417].

5.5. Apropos to the aforesaid direction, instead of granting the benefit of aforesaid Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988, the respondent vides its impugned communication dated 12.10.2017 denied such benefit to the petitioner.

5.6. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid impugned communication, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of this petition.

SUBMISSIONS OF T