Reserved On : 17/02/2026 Pronounced On : 06/03/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 208 of 2018 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT Sd/-

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

Approved for Reporting Yes No ✓

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

DINESH KANJIBHAI RATHAVA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR PH PATHAK(665) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MS. NIDHI VYAS, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s)

No. 1,2,3 ================================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT

CAV JUDGMENT

[1] Heard Mr. P.H.Pathak, learned advocate for the petitioner as also Ms. Nidhi Vyas, learned AGP for the respondents – State and its authorities, at length.

[2] This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner, under Articles 14 &

226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:-

“(A) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the conditions for forfeiting the earlier services in the order dated 17.11.2016 and 21.11.2016 as well as resolution dated 16.6.2015 (Annexure-A) which provides for forfeiture of earlier services and not counting the seniority from initial date of appointment as illegal, unjust, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and be pleased to quash and set aside the same to that extent.

(B) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to declare that the respondents have illegally wiped out the earlier services rendered by the petitioner as class- III employee in light of the judgment of the Hon.ble Supreme Court and hence, be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the seniority of the petitioner from his initial date of appointment in class-III post and grant all consequential benefits.

(C) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to declare that the respondents have illegally put the petition of fixed salary basis and hence, be pleased to direct the respondents to pay minimum pay scale with permissible allowances to the petitioner which is available to class-IV employee.

(D) The Hon.ble Court be pleased to declare the resolution dated 16.6.2015 as bad in law qua the extend that provides fixed salary instead of minimum pay scale and hence be pleased to direct the respondents to grant similar benefits as granted by the Hon.ble Supreme Court in Brijesh Vipinchandra Shah's case.

(E) Pending admission and final disposal of the petition, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondents to start paying regular salary to class-

IV employees, to the petitioner forthwith.

(F) Any other and further relief that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice be granted.”

FACTS OF THE CASE [3] The father of the petitioner was serving as a Beat Guard under respondent No.3 and while in service died in harness on 30.04.1994. Upon the death of his father, the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment, which was accepted. Accordingly, by letter / order dated 15.04.1996, the petitioner was appointed as a Clerk (Class-III) on ad-hoc basis in the pay scale of Rs.950-1500 vide order dated 01.07.1996.

[3.1] Further, as a condition of service, the petitioner was required to pass the pre-service training examination within the prescribed chances. Though the petitioner appeared in all available chances, he failed to clear the said examination.

[3.2] Apprehending termination, the petitioner approached this Court by filing Special Civil Application No.8638 of 1999, wherein interim relief was granted. The said petition came to be disposed of on 04.02.2002, with an observation that if the petitioner made an application for absorption on a Class-IV post (where passing of pre-service examination was not required), the authority may consider the same sympathetically. After disposal