SCA/203219/1992 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2032 of 1992 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ========================================================= 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 ? ========================================================= DEVJIBHAI J KHOKHARI - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR HARNISH V DARJI for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR JK SHAH AGP for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 11/12/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner by way of this petition has prayed to quash and set aside the order dated 30.11.1991 and further to direct the respondents to revise the pay of the petitioner with effect from 01.01.1986 in the pay- SCA/203219/1992 2/4 JUDGMENT scale of Rs.1400-2300. 2. The short facts of the case are :- 2.1. The petitioner was working as a Sanchalak with the Bharatiya Pragna Chakshu Gurukul since the year 1960. It is the case of the petitioner that after the approval of the Social Welfare Department in the year 1965, the pay-scale of the petitioner was revised as per Sarela Panch and he was appointed as Sanchalak vide order dated 01.06.1977. Thereafter, the petitioner's pay was fixed @ Rs.260-400/- on account of the pay commission which came into force with effect from 01.01.1973. 2.2. It is the case of the petitioner that the Local Fund Office vide letter dated 15.06.1989 had addressed a communication to the District Social Welfare Officer, Junagadh inter alia stating that the pay of the petitioner i.e. Of Rs.155-290/- does not appear in the Gujarat Civil Service Pay Rules, 1971 and, therefore, if any separate order is passed in that regard a copy thereof be supplied along with the documents of educational qualifications of the petitioner. It is further the case of the petitioner that the similarly situated person has been given different pay-scale than SCA/203219/1992 3/4 JUDGMENT the petitioner and the petitioner is discriminated. Thereafter, the petitioner on 19.11.1991 approached the Director, Assistant Director, Physically Handicapped, Special Officer and Administrative Officer and put forward his case that since he is to retire after three years, he should be given the benefit of pay. It is the case of the petitioner that to avoid the confusion further, he requested the respondent to show him as having appointed to the post of Assistant Teacher with effect from 01.01.1973 instead of Sanchalak and that to refix his pay-scale @ Rs.1400-2300 with effect from 01.01.1986. It is the case of the petitioner that thereafter the respondent vide letter dated 30.11.1991 removed the petitioner from the post of Sanchalak and approved him on the post of Assistant Teacher with effect from 01.12.1991 and also fixed the pay-scale @ Rs.1400- 23000 with effect from 01.12.1991. Hence, this petition. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. It is an admitted position that the petitioner himself has vide letter dated 19.11.1991 informed the respondent to place him to the post of Assistant Teacher instead of Sanchalak. Moreover, by an order passed on 30.11.1991 the post of Sanchalak is abolished by the respondent and the post of Assistant Teacher is created. Hence, SCA/203219/1992 4/4 JUDGMENT respondent while fixing the pay-scale has fixed the pay- scale of the petitioner with effect from 01.12.1991 instead of 01.01.1986. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in mind the Government Circular, the decision taken by the respondent is an administrative decision and is just and proper and no interference is called for from this Court. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. Rule is discharged. Interim relief if any, stands vacated. No order as to costs. [K.S. JHAVERI, J.] /phalguni/