Reserved On : 26/02/2026 Pronounced On : 06/03/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11095 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11092 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11093 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11094 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11875 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11876 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11877 of 2013 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR FIXING DATE OF HEARING) NO. 1 of 2019 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11877 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11878 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11879 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11880 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11881 of 2013 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11882 of 2013 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

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

Approved for Reporting Yes No ✓

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

ANIL BABUBHAI VAJA Versus GUJARAT MARITIME BOARD ==========================================================

Appearance:

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 RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT

COMMON CAV JUDGMENT

1. Since all the captioned batch of petitions are raising common issue, i.e., non-grant of appropriate higher pay scale by the respondent to the respective petitioners 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. 11092 of 2013 is considered as lead matter and the facts and prayers made therein are taken.

2. Heard 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 from his due date, with all consequential benefits including revision of pay, 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 which the Honourable Court may consider as just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, and (D) award the 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 Mazdoor since the year 1994 except in the case of the petitioner of Special Civil Application No. 11095 of 2013, wherein the petitioner was appointed as apprentice in the year 1993 and after successfully completing probation period of one year, ordered to be continued on long term basis in the year 1994. It is not in dispute that Mazdoor and Apprentice are Class-IV employees and drawing similar pay-scale and, thus, claimed the higher pay-scale prescribed for the post of Tradesman, i.e., next promotional post.

4.2 Upon completion of nine years