SCA/4032/1990 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4032 of 1990 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= DALABHAI SAVABHAI CHAMAR & 1 - Petitioner(s) Versus DIVISIONAL MANAGER & 1 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR BN RAVAL for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2. MR PM RAVAL for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE Date : 19/02/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The petitioners working as sub-staff with the respondents have moved this petition asserting the following facts. SCA/4032/1990 2/3 JUDGMENT 1.1. They were appointed with effect from 4.10.1980 as daily wagers after appropriate selection. That they were given regular posting and regular pay scale with effect from 10.3.1986. They assert that at the time of initial appointment, they were informed by the respondents that some stay in the Court was operating and, therefore, for the time being they would be paid daily wages. They were assured that as soon as the Court matter is over, they will be regularized with retrospective effect and will be paid difference of wages. Now that they were not given the regularization retrospectively with effect from 4.10.1980, they moved this petition making following prayers : “(a) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, direction or order under Article 226 Respondent no.1 and 2 to regularize service of the petitioner from 4.10.1980 with consequential benefits. (b) Pending hearing and final disposal of this petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct Respondent No.1 and 2 to pay to the petitioner in the pay scale which he would have been entitled by treating him in regular service from 4.10.1980. (C) Any other prayer(s) which may be deemed fit in the interest of justice may please be granted.” SCA/4032/1990 3/3 JUDGMENT 2. The petitioners have approached this Court in the year 1990. Differently put, the action is delayed. From the record sheet, it is found that similarly situated persons had preferred Special Civil Application Nos.5129, 5061 and 5119 of 1987 and they all have been dismissed by a coordinate Bench of this Court. In this matter, no interim relief was granted in favour of the petitioners. 3. The petitioners insisted for retrospective regularization and difference of pay on a claim of some oral understanding or promise given to them by officers of the respondents. This would certainly raise disputed questions of fact calling for proof by adducing evidence which exercise may not be possible to be undertaken by this Court while exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. This matter has been called out repeatedly three times during the day. It is an old matter. No one appears for the petitioners or for the respondents. In this set of circumstances, the petition stands dismissed for want of prosecution. Liberty reserved to the petitioner to move this Court in case of difficulty. Rule is discharged. No costs. ( A.L.DAVE, J ) srilatha