LPA/1395/2006 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 1395 of 2006 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 13661 of 2006 & CIVIL APPLICATION No. 13341 of 2006 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.M.DOSHIT & HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER ========================================================= 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 civil judge ? ========================================================= BABUBHAI NATTHUBHAI PATEL - Appellant(s) Versus GSRTC & 1 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR AV PRAJAPATI for Appellant MR HARDIK C RAWAL for Respondents ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.M.DOSHIT and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER 14th March, 2008 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.M.DOSHIT) Feeling aggrieved by the Order dated 15th LPA/1395/2006 2/3 JUDGMENT September, 2006 made by the learned Single Judge in above Special Civil Application No. 13661 of 2006, the appellant-writ petitioner has preferred the present Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. The appellant is a retired employee of the respondent-Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation [hereinafter referred to as, “the Corporation”]. On reaching the age of superannuation, the appellant retired from service of the Corporation on 31st May, 2004. In the writ petition, the appellant had prayed for remittance of the amount of leave encashment with interest @ 18% per annum. The petition was contested by the respondent-Corporation. According to the Corporation, it is running into losses. On account of its weak financial condition, it is unable to pay the retiral benefit to all its retired employees. The Corporation has, therefore, decided to pay retiral dues to all its employees in installments over a course of time. Further, the appellant has been paid retiral dues in the sum of around Rs.13 lakhs. Part of the amount due towards Leave Encashment has also been paid. In view of the above defence put forth by the LPA/1395/2006 3/3 JUDGMENT Corporation and the assurance that all retirees would be paid their retiral dues pro rata, the learned Single Judge rejected the writ petition. No need to give priority to the present appellant. No case for interference is made out. The Appeal is dismissed in limine. Civil Application stands disposed of. {Ms. R.M Doshit, J.} {K.M Thaker, J.} Prakash*