SCA/602/2004 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 602 of 2004 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD ========================================= = 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 ? ========================================= = BEHRA SHUKDEV INDRAMANI Versus DIRECTOR OF HEALTH & FAMILY SERVICES AND OTHERS ========================================= = Appearance : MR AM RAVAL for the Petitioner MR SP HASURKAR, ASSTT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent Nos. 1 & 3 MR HS MUNSHAW for Respondent No.2 ========================================= = CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD Date : 13/03/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. This is the case of the petitioner that while he was in service, he passed an examination known as D.P.H. in the year 1995. Soon after passing of this examination, he was promoted from Class-II to Class-I. This was the consequence of passing the examination. The SCA/602/2004 2/3 JUDGMENT petitioner had not asked for any other relief immediately after passing the examination. It is borne out from the record that in the year 2002, the petitioner has retired. Prior to the retirement, an application was moved on behalf of the petitioner that he is entitled for two advance increments. The request of the petitioner was turned down by the State Government, vide its letter dated 7.9.2001, which is produced at Annexure-'F' to the petition. The State Government has denied this request of the petitioner in view of the order of the Government passed on 26.4.2000, produced at Annexure-'G' to the petition. According to this order of the State Government, the provision of grant of advance increment was withdrawn by the State Government with immediate effect in 2000 in view of the passing of the order. However, it is mentioned in the order that any payments made prior to passing of this order will not be recovered. Thus, expressly meaning that if anybody has not been granted, he will not be granted and any person who has been granted, would not be asked to repay it. This withdrawal of facility was intended to be retrospective. The petitioner in 1995, when he passed the examination, did not ask for immediate grant of advance increments, perhaps because he was promoted with the eventuality of passing the examination. 2. Having considered all the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that after passing of the order dated 26.4.2000, when facility of grant of two increments has been SCA/602/2004 3/3 JUDGMENT withdrawn, grant was not possible to be made in favour of the petitioner, more particularly when on passing of the examination, immediately the petitioner was promoted from Class-II to Class-I. Therefore, advantage which could be derived by passing the examination had already been invested in the petitioner. The relief claimed for is, thus, is not liable to be granted to the petitioner. 3. The Court finds no force in the petition. The petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. No order as to cost. 4. This may also be noticed that refusal was communicated to the petitioner 2001 and the petition has been filed in 2004. Therefore, belated claim has been made by the petitioner. Therefore,the petition is not entitled to be considered on merits because of delay and laches. (BHAGWATI PRASAD, J.) omkar