Dismissed

Jasvantbhai Dahyabhai Solanki v. State of Gujarat Notice through Secretary Kamlesh Rabadia

Gujarat HC2 Sept 2022MCA/397/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gujarat High Court closed contempt proceedings initiated for alleged willful disobedience of an order directed the State to compute pension and grant higher pay-scale benefits. The court held that compliance with the direction to consider the claim was established, rendering further adjudication on partial non-compliance beyond the scope of this writ.

What the court decided

AI extract

Jasvantbhai Dahyabhai Solanki Vs State of Gujarat Notice… — Contempt of Court | Gujarat HC (2022)

¶1

C/MCA/397/2022 ORDER DATED: 02/09/2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 397 of 2022 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15199 of 2020

¶3

============================================= JASVANTBHAI DAHYABHAI SOLANKI

¶4

Versus

¶5

STATE OF GUJARAT NOTICE THROUGH SECRETARY KAMLESH RABADIA

¶6

============================================= Appearance:

¶7

MR VK JOSHI(2329) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 MR. ALKESH N SHAH(3749) for the Opponent(s) No. 2,3 MR KM ANTANI ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Opponent(s) No. 1,4

¶8

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

¶9

CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI

¶10

Date : 02/09/2022

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR)

¶13

This contempt proceedings have been initiated for alleged willful disobedience of order dated 08.02.2022 passed in Special Civil Application 15199 of 2020.

¶14

Respondents on being notified have filed their reply affidavit contending inter alia that the order passed by the learned Single Judge has since been complied. In the light of the stand taken by the respondents, we are of the considered view

¶15

Page 1 of 3

¶16

C/MCA/397/2022 ORDER DATED: 02/09/2022

¶17

that it would be apt and appropriate to extract the relevant portion of order dated 08.02.2022 which has been alleged to have been disobeyed or willfully not complied. It reads :

¶18

“4. Accordingly, the petitions are allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioners for grant of benefit of higher pay-scale on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service in view of the order dated 08.01.2014. The respondents shall also recompute and refix the pension and pensionary benefits of the petitioners on the basis of their initial date of joining service. The entire exercise together with calculating revised benefits of pension with arrears and payment thereof shall be done within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the writ of the order of this court. Direct Service is permitted.”

¶19

As could be seen from the above order, the direction issued to the respondents is two-fold, namely (1) to consider the case of the petitioners for grant of benefit of higher pay-scale, and (2) to recompute and refix the pension and pensionary benefits of petitioners on the basis of their initial date of joining service. The enclosures to the reply affidavit in general and in specific, the communication dated 13.07.2022 would indicate that claim of the petitioners have been considered and rejected. Insofar as, second direction is concerned, re-computation has been done and the difference of gratuity has been paid vide communication dated 28.03.2022 namely a sum of Rs.1,04,550/-,

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

C/MCA/397/2022 ORDER DATED: 02/09/2022

¶22

has been paid to complainants, the receipt of which is not disputed by the complainants. However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would vehemently contend that other benefits like leave encashment and higher pay-scale has not been granted. As could be seen from the direction issued, it was only the consideration of the petitioners’ claim for grant of benefit of higher pay-scale which had to be done, and the same having been done and rejected by communication dated 13.07.2022, it is open for the petitioners to challenge the same. Likewise, non payment of any additional benefits if any, which has not been granted according to the petitioners, which the respondent contends has been paid, cannot be the subject matter of adjudication in contempt proceedings. Hence, leaving open said issue and reserving right of the petitioners to challenge the communication dated 28.03.2022, if so advised, the present contempt proceedings stands closed. Notice stands discharged.

¶23

(ARAVIND KUMAR,CJ)

¶24

(ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI, J)

¶25

phalguni

¶26

Page 3 of 3

Jasvantbhai Dahyabhai Solanki v. State of Gujarat Notice through Secretary Kamlesh Rabadia

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Jasvantbhai Dahyabhai Solanki v. State of Gujarat Notice through Secretary Kamlesh Rabadia

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Samir Yasinbhai Chhipa Vs Firozbhai Jamalbhai Rinchwala

Khushal Sureshbhai Kansara Vs Ajitsinh Vala Police Inspector

Ramabhai Manabhai Patel Vs Special Land Acquisition Officer

Pratapbhai Galabbhai Pagi Vs Virendrasinh Revusinh Talar, Deputy Executive Engineer

Mustufa Usmanbhai Mansuri Vs Truptiben a Desai, Additional Director (I/C) and Deputy Director

Vaghela Linaben Rameshkumar Vs Vinod R Rao (Ias), Secretary, Primary Education Department