Home / Supreme Court / Judgments / 2011 / Diary 10189

BHANUMATIBEN UMIYASHANKER JOSHI v. STATE OF GUJARAT .

Supreme Court of India | Diary 10189/2011

Status

ROP - of Main Case

Decided On

01-07-2016

Bench

Petitioner

BHANUMATIBEN UMIYASHANKER JOSHI

Respondent

STATE OF GUJARAT .

Primary Holding

An employee appointed by a Gram Panchayat resolution to a sanctioned post, in the absence of prescribed recruitment rules at the time of appointment, is a validly appointed member of Panchayat Service entitled to pensionary benefits and gratuity, and the burden lies on the employer to demonstrate the specific procedure infracted or authority competent to appoint.

PDF 1 PDF 2 PDF 3 PDF 4 PDF 5 PDF 6 PDF 7 PDF 8 PDF 9 PDF 10 PDF 11 PDF 12 PDF 13 PDF 14 PDF 15 PDF 16 PDF 17 PDF 18 PDF 19 PDF 20 PDF 21 PDF 22 PDF 23 PDF 24 PDF 25 PDF 26 PDF 27 PDF 28 Check another SC case

Full Judgment Text

1 Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5441 OF 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.2324 of 2010) Harijan Paniben Dudabhai …… Appellant Versus State of Gujarat and others …… Respondents With CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5442 OF 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.8896 of 2010) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5443 OF 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.1305 of 2011) and CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5444 OF 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 9756 of 2011) JUDGMENT Uday Umesh Lalit, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. These appeals challenge common judgment of the High Court of Gujarat dated 02.07.2009. As Letters Patent Appeal No.1522 of 2004 was considered as lead matter by the High Court, the appeal arising therefrom is also

2 considered as lead matter by us. The facts giving rise to Letters Patent Appeal No.1522 of 2004 are dealt with in detail hereafter. 3. In terms of Gujarat Government Gazette dated 01.07.1961, the then Okha District Municipality got converted into Okha Gram and Nagar Panchayat on and w.e.f. 02.02.1962. Upon such conversion, the existing staff of municipality was allocated to Gram Panchayat and treated as part of Panchayat Service. Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) deals with Panchayat Service and various sets of Rules framed pursuant to the power conferred under the Act, deal with matters including classification of Panchayat Service and conditions of service as regards Panchayat Service. 4. Section 203 of the Act is to the following effect: “ 203. Panchayat Service to be regulated by rules – (1) For this purpose of bringing about uniform scales of pay uniform conditions of service for persons employed in the discharge of functions and duties of panchayats, there shall be constituted a Panchayat Service in connection with the affairs of panchayats. Such service shall be distinct from the State service. (2) The Panchayat Service shall consist of such classes, cadres and posts and the initials strength of officers and servants in each such class and cadre shall be such, as the State Government may by order from time to time determine: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall prevent a district panchayat from altering, with the previous approval of the State Government, any class, cadre or number of posts so determined by the State Government. (2A) (a) The cadres referred to in sub-section (2) may consist of district cadres, taluka cadres and local cadres. (b) A servant belonging to a district cadre shall be liable to be posted, whether by promotion or transfer to any post in any

3 gram or nagar in the same taluka. (c) A servant belonging to a taluka cadre shall be liable to be posted, whether by promotion or transfer to any post in any gram or nagar in the same taluka. (d) A servant belonging to a local cadre shall be liable to be posted whether by promotion or transfer to any post in the same gram or, as the case may be, nagar. (2B) In addition to the posts in the cadres referred to in sub-section (2A), a panchayat may have such other posts of such classes as the State Government may, by general or special order determine. Such posts shall be called “deputation posts” and shall be filled in accordance with the provisions of Section 207. (3) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the State Government may make rules regulating the mode of recruitment either by holding examinations or otherwise and conditions of service of persons appointed to the panchayat service and the powers in respect of appointments, transfers and promotions of officers and servants in the panchayats service and disciplinary action against any such officers or servants. (4) Rules made under sub-section(3) shall in particular contain – (a) a provision entitling servants of such cadres in the Panchayat Service to promotion to such cadres in the State Service as may be prescribed. (b) A provision specifying the clauses of posts recruitment to which shall be made through the District Panchayat Service Selection Committee and the class of posts, recruitment to which shall be made by the Gujarat Panchayat Service Selection Board, and (c) A provision regarding the percentage of vacancies to be reserved for the members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes in the Panchayat Service. (5) Such rules may provide for inter district transfers of servants belonging to the Panchayat Service and the circumstances in which and the conditions subject to which such transfers may be made .

4 (6) The promotion of a servant in a cadre in the Panchayat Service to a cadre in the State service in accordance with the rules made under clause (a) of the sub-section (4) shall not affect- (a) any obligation or liability incurred or default committed by such servant during the period of his service in a cadre in the Panchayat Service while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his duties as such servant, or (b) any investigation, disciplinary action or remedy in respect of such obligation, liability or default and any such investigation, disciplinary action or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced in accordance with the law applicable thereto during the said period of service by such authority as the State Government may, by general or special order specify in this behalf.” 5. In State of Gujarat and another v. Ramanlal Keshavlal Soni and others 1 a Constitution Bench of this Court held that Panchayat Service constituted under aforesaid Section 203 of the Act is a Civil Service of the State and the members of the Service are government servants. 6. Coming to the facts of the lead matter, one Vela Keshav, deceased husband of the appellant was appointed by Okha Gram Panchayat as Safai Kamdar on 04.02.1964. After having put in 33 years of service, he died in harness on 06.02.1997. The record indicates that monetary benefits such as Rs.14525.50 towards leave encashment, Rs.26,042/- towards Group Insurance and Rs.54,221/- towards General Provident Fund were paid to the appellant as legal representative of the deceased. The appellant represented that the family 1

(1983) 2 SCC 33

5 of Vela Keshav was also entitled to family pension and gratuity which claim having not been accepted, the appellant moved the High Court by filing Special Civil Application No. 354 of 2004. 7. Affidavits in opposition were filed by Deputy District Development Officer, District Panchayat, Jamnagar as respondent no.3 and by Sarpanch of Okha Gram Panchayat as respondent No.5. It was submitted by them that since the deceased was not recruited by the Gram Panchayat in accordance with the Statutory Rules, the appellant was not entitled to claim family pension. The matter came up before a Single Judge of the High Court who by her order dated 15.07.2004 dismissed the Special Civil Application. The submission advanced on behalf of the respondents that since the deceased was not appointed by the District Panchayat Service Selection Committee constituted under Section 2(11) of the Act, was not a member of the Panchayat Service as envisaged by Section 203 of the Act and as such the appellant was not entitled to claim any family pension or gratuity, was accepted by the Single Judge. 8. The appellant being aggrieved carried the matter further by filing Letters Patent Appeal No.1522 of 2004. At the appellate stage affidavit in reply filed by District Development Officer, District Panchayat, Jamnagar reiterated the earlier stand. An affidavit in reply on behalf of the State Government was filed by Deputy Secretary, Panchayats, Rural Housing and Rule Development Department, Gandhi Nagar which dealt with the matter in issue in following terms.

6 “ In the present case, since appellant has not undergone any selection procedure and he has obtained the employment only on the strength of passing resolution in panchayat, Okha Gram Panchayat has not made any proposal to regularize such unauthorized recruitment and appointment of petitioner’s husband. Therefore, he cannot be treated as an employee of local cadre of panchayat service and since he cannot be considered as a member of panchayat service, he is not entitled for any pensionary benefits from government treasury. It is the responsibility of Okha Gram Panchayat to pay pensionary benefit from its own fund as per the terms and conditions at the time of petitioner’s husband appointment by Okha Gram Panchayat…….” However what was the procedure which was prevalent in 1964 and how the appointment was bad or illegal, was not specified 9. The reply filed on behalf of respondent no.5 by the Administrator of Okha Municipal Borough was as under: “ The appointment of deceased Vela Keshav was made by the Gram Panchayat by passing a Resolution and he was holding the post within the sanctioned set up of Safai Kamdars (Sweepers). The said Resolutions of the Gram Panchayat making the appointment of the deceased are not available at present. However, the necessary entry made in the Service Book of the deceased employee showing the other details in the Service Record is available. …… .. The deceased employee was appointed as a Full time employee on the sanctioned set up of the Gram Panchayat getting regular salary. …… . The Okha Gram Panchayat appointed him as Safai Kamdar on the terms and conditions as its own employee where there were no rules. However, the fact remains that the deceased was holding the post on the set up sanctioned by the Development Commissioner and had continued till his retirement 2 as a regular full time 2

The Affidavit wrongly mentioned that the employee had continued till he retired. As a matter of fact, Vela Keshav had died in harness.

7 employee. Further, it cannot be said that his appointment was not made in accordance with the provisions under Section 203 of the Panchayat Act because no such rules of recruitment were as such framed on the date on which the deceased was appointed on 4.2.1964.” 10. The Division Bench of the High Court by its judgment and order under appeal dismissed Letters Patent Appeal No.1522 of 2004 and other connected matters. It was observed that only those employees who had been appointed following the procedure laid down in Section 203 of the Act and the rules framed thereunder, would alone be members of Panchayat Service, apart from the allocated employees from the municipality to the Panchayats at the time of formation of the Panchayats or such other employees who had been recognized as members of Panchayat Service by the State Government, or by the District Panchayat Selection Committee. It was further observed that merely because Panchayat had paid salary and other benefits to the deceased, it did not mean that he was member of Panchayat Service so as to get the benefits available to members of Panchayat Service like family pension and gratuity. 11. In the present case the deceased was appointed as Safai Kamdar on 4.2.1964 by Gram Panchayat by passing an appropriate resolution. It is true that Section 203(3) of the Act empowers the State Government to make rules regulating mode of recruitment. Our attention in that behalf was invited to Gujarat Service (Appointing Authorities) Rules, 1967. Rule 2 of the said Rules stipulates, inter alia, that the Appointing Authority in respect of posts under the Gram Panchayat, which are included in the “local cadre” is Gram Panchayat itself. The term “local cadre” finds elaboration in Part III of Gujarat Panchayat

8 Service (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1977 Rules). Part III captioned “Local Cadre” is to the following effect: “ I. Secretary of a Nagar Panchayat II The following posts under the Nagar or as the Case may be, Gram Panchayat, namely – 1. Chief Officer (Nagar Panchayat) 2. Head Clerk 3. Senior Clerk 4. Junior Clerk 5. Vasulati Clerk 6. Typist 7. Octroi clerk 8. Accountant 9. Cashier 10. Tax Inspector 11. Shop Inspector 12. Octroi Inspector 13. Overseer 14. Power House Manager 15. Driver 16. Cleaner 17. Posts required for schools run by the Panchayat 18. Posts required for dispensaries run by the Panchayat 19. Posts required for libraries run by the Panchayat 20. Posts required for dispensaries run by the Panchayat III All posts belonging to the inferior panchayat Service under Gram Panchayat or Nagar Panchayat. IV All other technical and non-technical posts under the Gram Panchayat or Nagar Panchayat.” 12. Item III of aforementioned Part III deals with “Inferior Panchayat Service” under Gram Panchayat or Nagar Panchayat which term is defined inter alia in Rule 2(h) of the 1977 Rules, as under: “ 2(h) “Superior Panchayat Service” and “Inferior Panchayat Service” means respectively the Superior Panchayat Service and

9 the Inferior Panchayat Service as constituted respectively by clause (a) and clause (d) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of the Gujarat Panchayat Service (Classification and Recruitment) Rules, 1967.” Sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of the Gujarat Panchayat Service (Classification and Recruitment) Rules, 1967 deals with Panchayat Service and stipulates that it shall consist of two classes, namely, “Superior Panchayat Service” and “Inferior Panchayat Service”. 13. The statutory provisions as mentioned above and the clear assertion by Respondent No.5 in his affidavit in reply, shows that in the year 1964 when deceased Vela Keshav came to be appointed, there were no rules governing the appointment in question. The rules regulating ‘Superior Panchayat Service’ and ‘Infereior Panchayat Service’ in the form of Gram Panchayat Service (Classification and Recruitment) Rules, 1967 came on the statute book in the year 1967. Going by the Gujarat Panchayat Service (Appointing Authorities) Rules, 1967, Gram Panchayat is the appropriate authority in respect of posts included in the Local Cadre. Thus, we do not find any infraction in the appointment of Vela Keshav, who was appointed pursuant to a resolution passed by Panchayat. Nothing has been pointed out how Gram Panchayat was not competent to make such appointment or that at the relevant time in question the power to make appointments was vested in an authority other than Gram Panchayat or that there was any separate modality or procedure prescribed for effecting such an appointment.

10 14. As detailed in the affidavit in reply on behalf of Respondent No.5, the deceased Vela Keshav was holding the post within the sanctioned set up of Safai Kamdars and that he was a full time employee getting regular salary. The deceased Vela Keshav had put in 33 years of service and died in harness. At no stage, while he was in service any objection or even a doubt was raised that he was not validly appointed. In our view, Vela Keshav must be held to be one who was regularly appointed and we do not find any infirmity or illegality in his appointment so as to disentitle the family of the benefits of family pension and gratuity. 15. At this stage, Circular dated 26.02.2008 issued by Government of Gujarat, Panchayat Rural Housing and Rural Development on 26.02.2008, which was placed on record by way of Additional Documents, may be adverted to. This Circular after considering cases of those who were appointed between 1.04.1963 and 5.05.1984, stated as under: “It is, therefore, informed to all the District Development Officers to initiate proceedings in accordance with the instructions given vide letters cited at preamble for regularizing services of the employees appointed/recruited under the converted gram/nagar panchayats during the period from 1.4.1963 to 10.7.1978 and 10.07.1978 to 5.06.1984 and to decide their other service related matters accordingly. Further, it is also hereby informed to submit proposal of posts of remaining employees as per item no.1 of letter at preamble 1 who have been recruited/appointed promoted during the period from 10.07.1978 to 5.06.1984 and on other aspects of the aforesaid letters also, if guidance/approval is required, DDO shall have to submit proposal through Development Officer’s office within six months after examining service record of each employee with their clear opinion.”

11 16. In the totality of circumstances, we find that the appellant cannot be denied the benefits in question. We, therefore allow this appeal and set aside the judgments and orders rendered by the Single Judge and the Division Bench and allow Special Civil Application No.354 of 2004. We direct the respondents to pay to the appellant all the arrears of pensionary benefits and gratuity with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum within two months from the date of this Judgment. 17. In appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.8896 of 2010, the appellant was appointed as a Peon on 4.4.1964 and in due course of time was promoted to the post of Sanitary Mukadam and later to the post of Octroi Clerk. He retired in the year 2001 after having put in 37 years of service and all through he was paid all the benefits including those under 4 th Pay Commission as a regular employee would receive. His case was dealt with on the strength of the Judgment in the lead matter by the High Court and since we have set aside the view taken by the High Court in the lead matter, this appeal also deserves to be allowed. While condoning the delay and allowing the appeal, the respondents are directed to pay the arrears of pensionary benefits and the amount of gratuity to the appellant along and gratuity with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum within two months from the date of this Judgment. 18. In appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.9756 of 2011, the deceased husband

12 of the present appellant was appointed as Sanitary Inspector by Okha Gram Panchayat on 14.12.1964 and the said appointment was later confirmed by Development Commissioner vide order dated 5.4.1973. In accordance with the view taken by us in the lead matter, this appeal also deserves to be allowed. Allowing the appeal, we direct the respondents to pay to the appellant all the arrears of family pension and the amount of gratuity with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum within two months from the date of this Judgment. 19. In appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.1305 of 2011 the appellant, 55 per cent physically handicapped, was appointed as Typist-cum-Clerk on 13.10.1969 and retired from service in the year 2001. It is true that his appointment was after the Gujarat Panchayat Service (Appointing Authorities) Rules, 1967 and other set of Rules came into force. But nothing has been placed on record indicating any prevalent procedure which was allegedly infracted or any reason why his appointment could be termed as illegal or invalid. All through his service till he retired, he was paid all the emoluments and salary like any regular employee. We see no reason why the appellant could be denied the pensionary benefits and gratuity. We allow this appeal and direct the respondent to pay to the appellant family pension and the amount of gratuity with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum within two months from the date of this Judgment.

13 20. All the appeals are allowed in the aforesaid terms without any order as to costs. ……………………………..J, (V. Gopala Gowda) ……………………………..J. (Uday Umesh Lalit) New Delhi, July 1 , 2016

14 ITEM NO.1A COURT NO.6 SECTION IX (For Judgment) S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS C.A. NO........../2016 @ Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 2324/2010 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 02/07/2009 in LPA No. 1522/2004 02/07/2009 in SCA No. 354/2004 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad) HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH C.A. NO........../2016 @ SLP(C) No. 8896/2010 C.A. NO........../2016 @ SLP(C) No. 1305/2011 C.A. NO........../2016 @ SLP(C) No. 9756/2011 Date : 01/07/2016 These matters were called on for pronouncement of judgment. For Petitioner(s) Mr. A. Venayagam Balan,AOR Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Hemantika Wahi,AOR Ms. Aagam Kaur,Adv. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit pronounced the judgment of the Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. Gopala Gowda and His Lordship. These appeals are allowed in terms of the signed judgment. (NARENDRA PRASAD) (SHARDA KAPOOR) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER (Signed 'Non-Reportable' Judgment is placed on the file)

1 Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5441 OF 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.2324 of 2010) Harijan Paniben Dudabhai …… Appellant Versus State of Gujarat and others …… Respondents With CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5442 OF 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.8896 of 2010) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5443 OF 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.1305 of 2011) and CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5444 OF 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 9756 of 2011) JUDGMENT Uday Umesh Lalit, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. These appeals challenge common judgment of the High Court of Gujarat dated 02.07.2009. As Letters Patent Appeal No.1522 of 2004 was considered as lead matter by the High Court, the appeal arising therefrom

2 is also considered as lead matter by us. The facts giving rise to Letters Patent Appeal No.1522 of 2004 are dealt with in detail hereafter. 3. In terms of Gujarat Government Gazette dated 01.07.1961, the then Okha District Municipality got converted into Okha Gram and Nagar Panchayat on and w.e.f. 02.02.1962. Upon such conversion, the existing staff of municipality was allocated to Gram Panchayat and treated as part of Panchayat Service. Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) deals with Panchayat Service and various sets of Rules framed pursuant to the power conferred under the Act, deal with matters including classification of Panchayat Service and conditions of service as regards Panchayat Service. 4. Section 203 of the Act is to the following effect: “ 203. Panchayat Service to be regulated by rules – (1) For this purpose of bringing about uniform scales of pay uniform conditions of service for persons employed in the discharge of functions and duties of panchayats, there shall be constituted a Panchayat Service in connection with the affairs of panchayats. Such service shall be distinct from the State service. (2) The Panchayat Service shall consist of such classes, cadres and posts and the initials strength of officers and servants in each such class and cadre shall be such, as the State Government may by order from time to time determine: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall prevent a district panchayat from altering, with the previous approval of the State Government, any class, cadre or number of posts so determined by the State Government.

3 (2A) (a) The cadres referred to in sub-section (2) may consist of district cadres, taluka cadres and local cadres. (b) A servant belonging to a district cadre shall be liable to be posted, whether by promotion or transfer to any post in any gram or nagar in the same taluka. (c) A servant belonging to a taluka cadre shall be liable to be posted, whether by promotion or transfer to any post in any gram or nagar in the same taluka. (d) A servant belonging to a local cadre shall be liable to be posted whether by promotion or transfer to any post in the same gram or, as the case may be, nagar. (2B) In addition to the posts in the cadres referred to in sub-section (2A), a panchayat may have such other posts of such classes as the State Government may, by general or special order determine. Such posts shall be called “deputation posts” and shall be filled in accordance with the provisions of Section 207. (3) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the State Government may make rules regulating the mode of recruitment either by holding examinations or otherwise and conditions of service of persons appointed to the panchayat service and the powers in respect of appointments, transfers and promotions of officers and servants in the panchayats service and disciplinary action against any such officers or servants. (4) Rules made under sub-section(3) shall in particular contain – (a) a provision entitling servants of such cadres in the Panchayat Service to promotion to such cadres in the State Service as may be prescribed. (b) A provision specifying the clauses of posts recruitment to which shall be made through the

4 District Panchayat Service Selection Committee and the class of posts, recruitment to which shall be made by the Gujarat Panchayat Service Selection Board, and (c) A provision regarding the percentage of vacancies to be reserved for the members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes in the Panchayat Service. (5) Such rules may provide for inter district transfers of servants belonging to the Panchayat Service and the circumstances in which and the conditions subject to which such transfers may be made . (6) The promotion of a servant in a cadre in the Panchayat Service to a cadre in the State service in accordance with the rules made under clause (a) of the sub-section (4) shall not affect- (a) any obligation or liability incurred or default committed by such servant during the period of his service in a cadre in the Panchayat Service while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his duties as such servant, or (b) any investigation, disciplinary action or remedy in respect of such obligation, liability or default and any such investigation, disciplinary action or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced in accordance with the law applicable thereto during the said period of service by such authority as the State Government may, by general or special order specify in this behalf.” 5. In State of Gujarat and another v. Ramanlal Keshavlal Soni and others 1 a Constitution Bench of this Court held that Panchayat Service 1

(1983) 2 SCC 33

5 constituted under aforesaid Section 203 of the Act is a Civil Service of the State and the members of the Service are government servants. 6. Coming to the facts of the lead matter, one Vela Keshav, deceased husband of the appellant was appointed by Okha Gram Panchayat as Safai Kamdar on 04.02.1964. After having put in 33 years of service, he died in harness on 06.02.1997. The record indicates that monetary benefits such as Rs.14525.50 towards leave encashment, Rs.26,042/- towards Group Insurance and Rs.54,221/- towards General Provident Fund were paid to the appellant as legal representative of the deceased. The appellant represented that the family of Vela Keshav was also entitled to family pension and gratuity which claim having not been accepted, the appellant moved the High Court by filing Special Civil Application No. 354 of 2004. 7. Affidavits in opposition were filed by Deputy District Development Officer, District Panchayat, Jamnagar as respondent no.3 and by Sarpanch of Okha Gram Panchayat as respondent No.5. It was submitted by them that since the deceased was not recruited by the Gram Panchayat in accordance with the Statutory Rules, the appellant was not entitled to claim family pension. The matter came up before a Single Judge of the High Court who by her order dated 15.07.2004 dismissed the Special Civil Application. The submission advanced on behalf of the respondents that since the deceased

6 was not appointed by the District Panchayat Service Selection Committee constituted under Section 2(11) of the Act, was not a member of the Panchayat Service as envisaged by Section 203 of the Act and as such the appellant was not entitled to claim any family pension or gratuity, was accepted by the Single Judge. 8. The appellant being aggrieved carried the matter further by filing Letters Patent Appeal No.1522 of 2004. At the appellate stage affidavit in reply filed by District Development Officer, District Panchayat, Jamnagar reiterated the earlier stand. An affidavit in reply on behalf of the State Government was filed by Deputy Secretary, Panchayats, Rural Housing and Rule Development Department, Gandhi Nagar which dealt with the matter in issue in following terms. “ In the present case, since appellant has not undergone any selection procedure and he has obtained the employment only on the strength of passing resolution in panchayat, Okha Gram Panchayat has not made any proposal to regularize such unauthorized recruitment and appointment of petitioner’s husband. Therefore, he cannot be treated as an employee of local cadre of panchayat service and since he cannot be considered as a member of panchayat service, he is not entitled for any pensionary benefits from government treasury. It is the responsibility of Okha Gram Panchayat to pay pensionary benefit from its own fund as per the terms and conditions at the time of petitioner’s husband appointment by Okha Gram Panchayat…….”

7 However what was the procedure which was prevalent in 1964 and how the appointment was bad or illegal, was not specified 9. The reply filed on behalf of respondent no.5 by the Administrator of Okha Municipal Borough was as under: “ The appointment of deceased Vela Keshav was made by the Gram Panchayat by passing a Resolution and he was holding the post within the sanctioned set up of Safai Kamdars (Sweepers). The said Resolutions of the Gram Panchayat making the appointment of the deceased are not available at present. However, the necessary entry made in the Service Book of the deceased employee showing the other details in the Service Record is available. …… .. The deceased employee was appointed as a Full time employee on the sanctioned set up of the Gram Panchayat getting regular salary. …… . The Okha Gram Panchayat appointed him as Safai Kamdar on the terms and conditions as its own employee where there were no rules. However, the fact remains that the deceased was holding the post on the set up sanctioned by the Development Commissioner and had continued till his retirement 2 as a regular full time employee. Further, it cannot be said that his appointment was not made in accordance with the provisions under Section 203 of the Panchayat Act because no such rules of recruitment were as such framed on the date on which the deceased was appointed on 4.2.1964.” 2

The Affidavit wrongly mentioned that the employee had continued till he retired. As a matter of fact, Vela Keshav had died in harness.

8 10. The Division Bench of the High Court by its judgment and order under appeal dismissed Letters Patent Appeal No.1522 of 2004 and other connected matters. It was observed that only those employees who had been appointed following the procedure laid down in Section 203 of the Act and the rules framed thereunder, would alone be members of Panchayat Service, apart from the allocated employees from the municipality to the Panchayats at the time of formation of the Panchayats or such other employees who had been recognized as members of Panchayat Service by the State Government, or by the District Panchayat Selection Committee. It was further observed that merely because Panchayat had paid salary and other benefits to the deceased, it did not mean that he was member of Panchayat Service so as to get the benefits available to members of Panchayat Service like family pension and gratuity. 11. In the present case the deceased was appointed as Safai Kamdar on 4.2.1964 by Gram Panchayat by passing an appropriate resolution. It is true that Section 203(3) of the Act empowers the State Government to make rules regulating mode of recruitment. Our attention in that behalf was invited to Gujarat Service (Appointing Authorities) Rules, 1967. Rule 2 of the said Rules stipulates, inter alia, that the Appointing Authority in respect of posts under the Gram Panchayat, which are included in the “local cadre” is Gram

9 Panchayat itself. The term “local cadre” finds elaboration in Part III of Gujarat Panchayat Service (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1977 Rules). Part III captioned “Local Cadre” is to the following effect: “ I. Secretary of a Nagar Panchayat II The following posts under the Nagar or as the Case may be, Gram Panchayat, namely – 1. Chief Officer (Nagar Panchayat) 2. Head Clerk 3. Senior Clerk 4. Junior Clerk 5. Vasulati Clerk 6. Typist 7. Octroi clerk 8. Accountant 9. Cashier 10. Tax Inspector 11. Shop Inspector 12. Octroi Inspector 13. Overseer 14. Power House Manager 15. Driver 16. Cleaner 17. Posts required for schools run by the Panchayat 18. Posts required for dispensaries run by the Panchayat 19. Posts required for libraries run by the Panchayat 20. Posts required for dispensaries run by the Panchayat III All posts belonging to the inferior panchayat Service under Gram Panchayat or Nagar Panchayat. IV All other technical and non-technical posts under the Gram Panchayat or Nagar Panchayat.”

10 12. Item III of aforementioned Part III deals with “Inferior Panchayat Service” under Gram Panchayat or Nagar Panchayat which term is defined inter alia in Rule 2(h) of the 1977 Rules, as under: “ 2(h) “Superior Panchayat Service” and “Inferior Panchayat Service” means respectively the Superior Panchayat Service and the Inferior Panchayat Service as constituted respectively by clause (a) and clause (d) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of the Gujarat Panchayat Service (Classification and Recruitment) Rules, 1967.” Sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of the Gujarat Panchayat Service (Classification and Recruitment) Rules, 1967 deals with Panchayat Service and stipulates that it shall consist of two classes, namely, “Superior Panchayat Service” and “Inferior Panchayat Service”. 13. The statutory provisions as mentioned above and the clear assertion by Respondent No.5 in his affidavit in reply, shows that in the year 1964 when deceased Vela Keshav came to be appointed, there were no rules governing the appointment in question. The rules regulating ‘Superior Panchayat Service’ and ‘Infereior Panchayat Service’ in the form of Gram Panchayat Service (Classification and Recruitment) Rules, 1967 came on the statute book in the year 1967. Going by the Gujarat Panchayat Service (Appointing Authorities) Rules, 1967, Gram Panchayat is the appropriate authority in respect of posts included in the Local Cadre. Thus, we do not

11 find any infraction in the appointment of Vela Keshav, who was appointed pursuant to a resolution passed by Panchayat. Nothing has been pointed out how Gram Panchayat was not competent to make such appointment or that at the relevant time in question the power to make appointments was vested in an authority other than Gram Panchayat or that there was any separate modality or procedure prescribed for effecting such an appointment. 14. As detailed in the affidavit in reply on behalf of Respondent No.5, the deceased Vela Keshav was holding the post within the sanctioned set up of Safai Kamdars and that he was a full time employee getting regular salary. The deceased Vela Keshav had put in 33 years of service and died in harness. At no stage, while he was in service any objection or even a doubt was raised that he was not validly appointed. In our view, Vela Keshav must be held to be one who was regularly appointed and we do not find any infirmity or illegality in his appointment so as to disentitle the family of the benefits of family pension and gratuity. 15. At this stage, Circular dated 26.02.2008 issued by Government of Gujarat, Panchayat Rural Housing and Rural Development on 26.02.2008, which was placed on record by way of Additional Documents, may be

12 adverted to. This Circular after considering cases of those who were appointed between 1.04.1963 and 5.05.1984, stated as under: “It is, therefore, informed to all the District Development Officers to initiate proceedings in accordance with the instructions given vide letters cited at preamble for regularizing services of the employees appointed/recruited under the converted gram/nagar panchayats during the period from 1.4.1963 to 10.7.1978 and 10.07.1978 to 5.06.1984 and to decide their other service related matters accordingly. Further, it is also hereby informed to submit proposal of posts of remaining employees as per item no.1 of letter at preamble 1 who have been recruited/appointed promoted during the period from 10.07.1978 to 5.06.1984 and on other aspects of the aforesaid letters also, if guidance/approval is required, DDO shall have to submit proposal through Development Officer’s office within six months after examining service record of each employee with their clear opinion.” 16. In the totality of circumstances, we find that the appellant cannot be denied the benefits in question. We, therefore allow this appeal and set aside the judgments and orders rendered by the Single Judge and the Division Bench and allow Special Civil Application No.354 of 2004. We direct the respondents to pay to the appellant all the arrears of pensionary benefits and gratuity with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum within two months from the date of this Judgment. 17. In appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.8896 of 2010, the appellant was appointed as a Peon on 4.4.1964 and in due course of time was promoted to

13 the post of Sanitary Mukadam and later to the post of Octroi Clerk. He retired in the year 2001 after having put in 37 years of service and all through he was paid all the benefits including those under 4 th Pay Commission as a regular employee would receive. His case was dealt with on the strength of the Judgment in the lead matter by the High Court and since we have set aside the view taken by the High Court in the lead matter, this appeal also deserves to be allowed. While condoning the delay and allowing the appeal, the respondents are directed to pay the arrears of pensionary benefits and the amount of gratuity to the appellant along and gratuity with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum within two months from the date of this Judgment. 18. In appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.9756 of 2011, the deceased husband of the present appellant was appointed as Sanitary Inspector by Okha Gram Panchayat on 14.12.1964 and the said appointment was later confirmed by Development Commissioner vide order dated 5.4.1973. In accordance with the view taken by us in the lead matter, this appeal also deserves to be allowed. Allowing the appeal, we direct the respondents to pay to the appellant all the arrears of family pension and the amount of gratuity with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum within two months from the date of this Judgment.

14 19. In appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.1305 of 2011 the appellant, 55 per cent physically handicapped, was appointed as Typist-cum-Clerk on 13.10.1969 and retired from service in the year 2001. It is true that his appointment was after the Gujarat Panchayat Service (Appointing Authorities) Rules, 1967 and other set of Rules came into force. But nothing has been placed on record indicating any prevalent procedure which was allegedly infracted or any reason why his appointment could be termed as illegal or invalid. All through his service till he retired, he was paid all the emoluments and salary like any regular employee. We see no reason why the appellant could be denied the pensionary benefits and gratuity. We allow this appeal and direct the respondent to pay to the appellant family pension and the amount of gratuity with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum within two months from the date of this Judgment. 20. All the appeals are allowed in the aforesaid terms without any order as to costs. ……………………………..J, (V. Gopala Gowda) ……………………………..J. (Uday Umesh Lalit) New Delhi, July 1 , 2016

Ä 1 Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5441 OF 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.2324 of 2010) Harijan Paniben Dudabhai ...... Appellant Versus State of Gujarat and others ...... Respondents With CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5442 OF 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.8896 of 2010) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5443 OF 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.1305 of 2011) and CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5444 OF 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 9756 of 2011) JUDGMENT Uday Umesh Lalit, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. These appeals challenge common judgment of the High Court of GujaratSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byNARENDRA PRASAD dated 02.07.2009. As Letters Patent Appeal No.1522 of 2004 was consideredDate: 2016.07.0213:39:38 ISTReason: as lead matter by the High Court, the appeal arising therefrom is also 2considered as lead matter by us. The facts giving rise to Letters Patent AppealNo.1522 of 2004 are dealt with in detail hereafter.3. In terms of Gujarat Government Gazette dated 01.07.1961, the thenOkha District Municipality got converted into Okha Gram and NagarPanchayat on and w.e.f. 02.02.1962. Upon such conversion, the existing staff of

municipality was allocated to Gram Panchayat and treated as part of PanchayatService. Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act")deals with Panchayat Service and various sets of Rules framed pursuant to thepower conferred under the Act, deal with matters including classification ofPanchayat Service and conditions of service as regards Panchayat Service.4. Section 203 of the Act is to the following effect: "203. Panchayat Service to be regulated by rules - (1) For this purpose of bringing about uniform scales of pay uniform conditions of service for persons employed in the discharge of functions and duties of panchayats, there shall be constituted a Panchayat Service in connection with the affairs of panchayats. Such service shall be distinct from the State service. (2) The Panchayat Service shall consist of such classes, cadres and posts and the initials strength of officers and servants in each such class and cadre shall be such, as the State Government may by order from time to time determine: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall prevent a district panchayat from altering, with the previous approval of the State Government, any class, cadre or number of posts so determined by the State Government. (2A) (a) The cadres referred to in sub-section (2) may consist of district cadres, taluka cadres and local cadres. (b) A servant belonging to a district cadre shall be liable to be posted, whether by promotion or transfer to any post in any 3 gram or nagar in the same taluka. (c) A servant belonging to a taluka cadre shall be liable to be posted, whether by promotion or transfer to any post in any gram or nagar in the same taluka. (d) A servant belonging to a local cadre shall be liable to be posted whether by promotion or transfer to any post in the same gram or, as the case may be, nagar. (2B) In addition to the posts in the cadres referred to in sub-section (2A), a panchayat may have such other posts of such classes as the State Government may, by general or special order determine. Such posts shall be called "deputation posts" and shall be filled in accordance with the provisions of Section 207. (3) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the State Government may make rules regulating the mode of recruitment either by holding examinations or otherwise and conditions of service of persons appointed to the panchayat service and the powers in respect of appointments, transfers and promotions of officers and servants in the panchayats service and disciplinary action against any such officers or servants. (4) Rules made under sub-section(3) shall in particular contain - (a) a provision entitling servants of such cadres in the Panchayat Service to promotion to such cadres in the State Service as may be prescribed. (b) A provision specifying the clauses of posts recruitment to which shall be made through the District Panchayat Service Selection Committee and the class of posts,

recruitment to which shall be made by the Gujarat Panchayat Service Selection Board, and (c) A provision regarding the percentage of vacancies to be reserved for the members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes in the Panchayat Service.(5) Such rules may provide for inter district transfers of servantsbelonging to the Panchayat Service and the circumstances in whichand the conditions subject to which such transfers may be made . 4 (6) The promotion of a servant in a cadre in the Panchayat Service to a cadre in the State service in accordance with the rules made under clause (a) of the sub-section (4) shall not affect- (a) any obligation or liability incurred or default committed by such servant during the period of his service in a cadre in the Panchayat Service while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his duties as such servant, or (b) any investigation, disciplinary action or remedy in respect of such obligation, liability or default and any such investigation, disciplinary action or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced in accordance with the law applicable thereto during the said period of service by such authority as the State Government may, by general or special order specify in this behalf." 5. In State of Gujarat and another v. Ramanlal Keshavlal Soni and others1 a Constitution Bench of this Court held that Panchayat Service constituted under aforesaid Section 203 of the Act is a Civil Service of the State and the members of the Service are government servants. 6. Coming to the facts of the lead matter, one Vela Keshav, deceased husband of the appellant was appointed by Okha Gram Panchayat as Safai Kamdar on 04.02.1964. After having put in 33 years of service, he died in harness on 06.02.1997. The record indicates that monetary benefits such as Rs.14525.50 towards leave encashment, Rs.26,042/- towards Group Insurance and Rs.54,221/- towards General Provident Fund were paid to the appellant as legal representative of the deceased. The appellant represented that the family1 (1983) 2 SCC 33 5of Vela Keshav was also entitled to family pension and gratuity which claimhaving not been accepted, the appellant moved the High Court by filing SpecialCivil Application No. 354 of 2004.7. Affidavits in opposition were filed by Deputy District DevelopmentOfficer, District Panchayat, Jamnagar as respondent no.3 and by Sarpanch of

Okha Gram Panchayat as respondent No.5. It was submitted by them that sincethe deceased was not recruited by the Gram Panchayat in accordance with theStatutory Rules, the appellant was not entitled to claim family pension. Thematter came up before a Single Judge of the High Court who by her order dated15.07.2004 dismissed the Special Civil Application. The submission advancedon behalf of the respondents that since the deceased was not appointed by theDistrict Panchayat Service Selection Committee constituted under Section 2(11)of the Act, was not a member of the Panchayat Service as envisaged by Section203 of the Act and as such the appellant was not entitled to claim any familypension or gratuity, was accepted by the Single Judge.8. The appellant being aggrieved carried the matter further by filing LettersPatent Appeal No.1522 of 2004. At the appellate stage affidavit in reply filedby District Development Officer, District Panchayat, Jamnagar reiterated theearlier stand. An affidavit in reply on behalf of the State Government was filedby Deputy Secretary, Panchayats, Rural Housing and Rule DevelopmentDepartment, Gandhi Nagar which dealt with the matter in issue in followingterms. 6 "In the present case, since appellant has not undergone any selection procedure and he has obtained the employment only on the strength of passing resolution in panchayat, Okha Gram Panchayat has not made any proposal to regularize such unauthorized recruitment and appointment of petitioner's husband. Therefore, he cannot be treated as an employee of local cadre of panchayat service and since he cannot be considered as a member of panchayat service, he is not entitled for any pensionary benefits from government treasury. It is the responsibility of Okha Gram Panchayat to pay pensionary benefit from its own fund as per the terms and conditions at the time of petitioner's husband appointment by Okha Gram Panchayat......." However what was the procedure which was prevalent in 1964 and how the appointment was bad or illegal, was not specified 9. The reply filed on behalf of respondent no.5 by the Administrator of Okha Municipal Borough was as under: "The appointment of deceased Vela Keshav was made by the Gram Panchayat by passing a Resolution and he was holding the post within the sanctioned set up of Safai Kamdars (Sweepers). The said Resolutions of the Gram Panchayat making the appointment of the deceased are not available at present. However, the necessary entry made in the Service Book of the deceased employee showing the other details in the Service Record is available. ........

The deceased employee was appointed as a Full time employee on the sanctioned set up of the Gram Panchayat getting regular salary. ....... The Okha Gram Panchayat appointed him as Safai Kamdar on the terms and conditions as its own employee where there were no rules. However, the fact remains that the deceased was holding the post on the set up sanctioned by the Development Commissioner and had continued till his retirement2 as a regular full time2 The Affidavit wrongly mentioned that the employee had continued till he retired. As a matter of fact, Vela Keshav had died in harness. 7 employee. Further, it cannot be said that his appointment was not made in accordance with the provisions under Section 203 of the Panchayat Act because no such rules of recruitment were as such framed on the date on which the deceased was appointed on 4.2.1964."10. The Division Bench of the High Court by its judgment and order underappeal dismissed Letters Patent Appeal No.1522 of 2004 and other connectedmatters. It was observed that only those employees who had been appointedfollowing the procedure laid down in Section 203 of the Act and the rulesframed thereunder, would alone be members of Panchayat Service, apart fromthe allocated employees from the municipality to the Panchayats at the time offormation of the Panchayats or such other employees who had been recognizedas members of Panchayat Service by the State Government, or by the DistrictPanchayat Selection Committee. It was further observed that merely becausePanchayat had paid salary and other benefits to the deceased, it did not meanthat he was member of Panchayat Service so as to get the benefits available tomembers of Panchayat Service like family pension and gratuity.11. In the present case the deceased was appointed as Safai Kamdar on4.2.1964 by Gram Panchayat by passing an appropriate resolution. It is truethat Section 203(3) of the Act empowers the State Government to make rulesregulating mode of recruitment. Our attention in that behalf was invited toGujarat Service (Appointing Authorities) Rules, 1967. Rule 2 of the said Rulesstipulates, inter alia, that the Appointing Authority in respect of posts under theGram Panchayat, which are included in the "local cadre" is Gram Panchayatitself. The term "local cadre" finds elaboration in Part III of Gujarat Panchayat 8Service (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as "the1977 Rules). Part III captioned "Local Cadre" is to the following effect: "I. Secretary of a Nagar Panchayat II The following posts under the Nagar or as the Case may be, Gram Panchayat, namely -

1. Chief Officer (Nagar Panchayat) 2. Head Clerk 3. Senior Clerk 4. Junior Clerk 5. Vasulati Clerk 6. Typist 7. Octroi clerk 8. Accountant 9. Cashier 10.Tax Inspector 11.Shop Inspector 12.Octroi Inspector 13.Overseer 14.Power House Manager 15.Driver 16.Cleaner 17.Posts required for schools run by the Panchayat 18.Posts required for dispensaries run by the Panchayat 19.Posts required for libraries run by the Panchayat 20. Posts required for dispensaries run by the Panchayat III All posts belonging to the inferior panchayat Service under Gram Panchayat or Nagar Panchayat. IV All other technical and non-technical posts under the Gram Panchayat or Nagar Panchayat."12. Item III of aforementioned Part III deals with "Inferior PanchayatService" under Gram Panchayat or Nagar Panchayat which term is defined interalia in Rule 2(h) of the 1977 Rules, as under: "2(h) "Superior Panchayat Service" and "Inferior Panchayat Service" means respectively the Superior Panchayat Service and 9 the Inferior Panchayat Service as constituted respectively by clause (a) and clause (d) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of the Gujarat Panchayat Service (Classification and Recruitment) Rules, 1967." Sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of the Gujarat Panchayat Service (Classificationand Recruitment) Rules, 1967 deals with Panchayat Service and stipulates thatit shall consist of two classes, namely, "Superior Panchayat Service" and"Inferior Panchayat Service".13. The statutory provisions as mentioned above and the clear assertion byRespondent No.5 in his affidavit in reply, shows that in the year 1964 whendeceased Vela Keshav came to be appointed, there were no rules governing theappointment in question. The rules regulating `Superior Panchayat Service' and`Infereior Panchayat Service' in the form of Gram Panchayat Service(Classification and Recruitment) Rules, 1967 came on the statute book in theyear 1967. Going by the Gujarat Panchayat Service (Appointing Authorities)Rules, 1967, Gram Panchayat is the appropriate authority in respect of posts

included in the Local Cadre. Thus, we do not find any infraction in theappointment of Vela Keshav, who was appointed pursuant to a resolution passedby Panchayat. Nothing has been pointed out how Gram Panchayat was notcompetent to make such appointment or that at the relevant time in question thepower to make appointments was vested in an authority other than GramPanchayat or that there was any separate modality or procedure prescribed foreffecting such an appointment. 1014. As detailed in the affidavit in reply on behalf of Respondent No.5, thedeceased Vela Keshav was holding the post within the sanctioned set up ofSafai Kamdars and that he was a full time employee getting regular salary. Thedeceased Vela Keshav had put in 33 years of service and died in harness. At nostage, while he was in service any objection or even a doubt was raised that hewas not validly appointed. In our view, Vela Keshav must be held to be onewho was regularly appointed and we do not find any infirmity or illegality inhis appointment so as to disentitle the family of the benefits of family pensionand gratuity.15. At this stage, Circular dated 26.02.2008 issued by Government ofGujarat, Panchayat Rural Housing and Rural Development on 26.02.2008,which was placed on record by way of Additional Documents, may be advertedto. This Circular after considering cases of those who were appointed between1.04.1963 and 5.05.1984, stated as under: "It is, therefore, informed to all the District Development Officers to initiate proceedings in accordance with the instructions given vide letters cited at preamble for regularizing services of the employees appointed/recruited under the converted gram/nagar panchayats during the period from 1.4.1963 to 10.7.1978 and 10.07.1978 to 5.06.1984 and to decide their other service related matters accordingly. Further, it is also hereby informed to submit proposal of posts of remaining employees as per item no.1 of letter at preamble 1 who have been recruited/appointed promoted during the period from 10.07.1978 to 5.06.1984 and on other aspects of the aforesaid letters also, if guidance/approval is required, DDO shall have to submit proposal through Development Officer's office within six months after examining service record of each employee with their clear opinion." 1116. In the totality of circumstances, we find that the appellant cannot bedenied the benefits in question. We, therefore allow this appeal and set asidethe judgments and orders rendered by the Single Judge and the Division Bench

and allow Special Civil Application No.354 of 2004. We direct the respondentsto pay to the appellant all the arrears of pensionary benefits and gratuity withsimple interest at the rate of 9% per annum within two months from the date ofthis Judgment.17. In appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.8896 of 2010, the appellant wasappointed as a Peon on 4.4.1964 and in due course of time was promoted to thepost of Sanitary Mukadam and later to the post of Octroi Clerk. He retired inthe year 2001 after having put in 37 years of service and all through he was paidall the benefits including those under 4th Pay Commission as a regular employeewould receive. His case was dealt with on the strength of the Judgment in thelead matter by the High Court and since we have set aside the view taken by theHigh Court in the lead matter, this appeal also deserves to be allowed. Whilecondoning the delay and allowing the appeal, the respondents are directed topay the arrears of pensionary benefits and the amount of gratuity to theappellant along and gratuity with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annumwithin two months from the date of this Judgment.18. In appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.9756 of 2011, the deceased husband 12of the present appellant was appointed as Sanitary Inspector by Okha GramPanchayat on 14.12.1964 and the said appointment was later confirmed byDevelopment Commissioner vide order dated 5.4.1973. In accordance with theview taken by us in the lead matter, this appeal also deserves to be allowed.Allowing the appeal, we direct the respondents to pay to the appellant all thearrears of family pension and the amount of gratuity with simple interest at therate of 9% per annum within two months from the date of this Judgment.19. In appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.1305 of 2011 the appellant, 55 percent physically handicapped, was appointed as Typist-cum-Clerk on 13.10.1969and retired from service in the year 2001. It is true that his appointment wasafter the Gujarat Panchayat Service (Appointing Authorities) Rules, 1967 andother set of Rules came into force. But nothing has been placed on recordindicating any prevalent procedure which was allegedly infracted or any reasonwhy his appointment could be termed as illegal or invalid. All through hisservice till he retired, he was paid all the emoluments and salary like anyregular employee. We see no reason why the appellant could be denied the

pensionary benefits and gratuity. We allow this appeal and direct therespondent to pay to the appellant family pension and the amount of gratuitywith simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum within two months from thedate of this Judgment. 1320. All the appeals are allowed in the aforesaid terms without any order as tocosts. ...................................J, (V. Gopala Gowda) ...................................J. (Uday Umesh Lalit)New Delhi,July 1 , 2016 14ITEM NO.1A COURT NO.6 SECTION IX(For Judgment) S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSC.A. NO........../2016 @Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 2324/2010(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 02/07/2009in LPA No. 1522/2004 02/07/2009 in SCA No. 354/2004 passed by theHigh Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad)HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)WITHC.A. NO........../2016 @ SLP(C) No. 8896/2010C.A. NO........../2016 @ SLP(C) No. 1305/2011C.A. NO........../2016 @ SLP(C) No. 9756/2011Date : 01/07/2016 These matters were called on for pronouncement of judgment.For Petitioner(s) Mr. A. Venayagam Balan,AOR Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,AOR Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,AORFor Respondent(s) Ms. Hemantika Wahi,AOR Ms. Aagam Kaur,Adv. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit pronounced the judgment of the Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. Gopala Gowda and His Lordship. These appeals are allowed in terms of the signed judgment.

(NARENDRA PRASAD) (SHARDA KAPOOR) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER (Signed 'Non-Reportable' Judgment is placed on the file)

S.L.P.(C) No. 2324/2010 etc. 1 ITEM NO.48 COURT NO.10 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 2324/2010 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 02/07/2009 in LPA No. 1522/2004 in SCA No. 354/2004 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad) HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s) (with interim relief and office report) (For Final Disposal) WITH SLP(C) No. 8896/2010 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP, exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment, permission to file additional documents and Office Report) (For Final Disposal) SLP(C) No. 1305/2011 (With Office Report) (For Final Disposal) SLP(C) No. 9756/2011 (With Office Report) (For Final Disposal) Date : 11/01/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. GOPALA GOWDA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Hemal Kirit Kumar Sheth, Adv. Mr. A. Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Ms. Sucheta Joshi, Adv. Mr. Ritwiz Rishabh, Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Madhvi Divan, Adv. Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. Ms. Jesal Wahi, Adv. Ms. Puja Singh, Adv. Contd. 2..

S.L.P.(C) No. 2324/2010 etc. 2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the parties. Arguments concluded. Judgment reserved. (S. K. RAKHEJA) COURT MASTER (MALA KUMARI SHARMA) COURT MASTER

\224 S.L.P.(C) No. 2324/2010 etc. 1 ITEM NO.48 COURT NO.10 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 2324/2010 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 02/07/2009 in LPA No. 1522/2004 in SCA No. 354/2004 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad) HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s) (with interim relief and office report) (For Final Disposal) WITH SLP(C) No. 8896/2010 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP, exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment, permission to file additional documents and Office Report) (For Final Disposal) SLP(C) No. 1305/2011 (With Office Report) (For Final Disposal) SLP(C) No. 9756/2011 (With Office Report) (For Final Disposal) Date : 11/01/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. GOPALA GOWDA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Hemal Kirit Kumar Sheth, Adv. Mr. A. Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Ms. Sucheta Joshi, Adv. Mr. Ritwiz Rishabh, Adv.Signature Not Verified For Respondent(s) Ms. Madhvi Divan, Adv.Digitally signed byVinod KumarDate: 2016.01.1118:12:43 ISTReason: Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. Ms. Jesal Wahi, Adv. Ms. Puja Singh, Adv. Contd. 2..S.L.P.(C) No. 2324/2010 etc. 2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

Heard learned counsel for the parties. Arguments concluded. Judgment reserved. (S. K. RAKHEJA) (MALA KUMARI SHARMA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

SECTION. IX IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010 (From the judgement and order dated 02/07/2009 in SCA No. 354/2004 & LPA No . 1522/2004 of The HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD) HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s) OFFICE REPORT SLP (Civil) No. 2324 of 2010 The matter above-mentioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 04th January, 2010, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order:- "Delay condoned. Issue notice." Thereafter, the matters above-mentioned were listed before the Hon'ble Court on 20th January, 2012, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order:- "Post for final disposal." It is submitted for the information of the Hon'ble Court that there are five common Respondents are represented through Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Advocate. She has filed Counter Affidavit on behalf of Respondent No. 3 in all the SLPs which has already been included in the paper books. It is further submitted that Counsel for the Petitioner has not filed Rejoinder Affidavit vide Court's order dated 16.12.2011. Service of notice is complete in all the SLPs. The matters above-mentioned are listed before the Hon'ble Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 30th day of August, 2013. DEPUTY REGISTRAR

¢ITEM NO.202 COURT NO.11 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010(From the judgement and order dated 02/07/2009 in LPA No.1522/2004 of TheHIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD)HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With prayer for interim relief and office report )(for final disposal)WITH SLP(C) NO. 1305 of 2011(With office report)SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With appln. for c/d in filing SLP and exem. from filing c/c of theimpugned judgment and OT and office report)SLP(C) NO. 9756 of 2011(With office report)(for final disposal in all matters)Date: 02/09/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. GOKHALE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Hemal K. Seth,Adv. Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mrs. Santhana Lakshmi,Adv. Mr. Hasit H.Joshi,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. Shankar Narayanan,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv.For Respondent(s) Ms. Madhvi Diwan,Adv. Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. Ms. Shubheda Deshpande,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on a non-miscellaneous day in the month of January, 2014. [SUMAN WADHWA] [SNEH LATA SHARMA] AR-cum-PS COURT MASTER

4ITEM NO.1 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SUNIL THOMASPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) D.No(s).1305/2011VENKAT(D) TR.LRS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR Respondent(s)(Application for withdrawal of Special Leave Petition with office report)Date: 12/07/2012 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Dr. R.R. Deshpande, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed a letter dated30.03.2012 seeking permission to withdraw the Special Leave Petition, whichis at the Diary stage. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Counsel for the petitioners is allowed to withdraw the Special LeavePetition. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. [SUNIL THOMAS] REGISTRARJKA

bITEM NO.44 COURT NO.5 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010(From the judgement and order dated 02/07/2009 in LPA No.1522/2004i SCA No.354/2004 of The HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD)HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With prayer for interim relief and office report )WITH SLP(C) NO. 1305 of 2011(With office report)SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With appln.for c/delay in filing SLP and exemption from filing c/cof the impugned judgment and exemption from filing OT and officereport)SLP(C) NO. 9756 of 2011(With office report)Date: 20/01/2012 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. SATHASIVAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Hemal K. Sheth, Adv. Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Gaurav Agrawal, Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Preetesh Kapur, Adv. Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Post for final disposal. [ Usha Bhardwaj ] [ Veena Khera ] Court Master Court Master

\222ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.5 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010(From the judgement and order dated 02/07/2009 in LPA No.1522/2004in SCA No.354/2004 of The HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD)HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With prayer for interim relief and office report)WITH SLP(C) NO. 1305 of 2011(With office report)SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With appln.for c/delay in filing SLP and exemption from filing c/cof the impugned judgment and exemption from filing OT & officereport)SLP(C) NO. 9756 of 2011(With office report)Date: 16/12/2011 Thesd Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. SATHASIVAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Hemal K. Sheth, Adv. Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Gaurav Agrawal, Adv, Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr.Preetesh Kapur, Adv. Ms.Jesal, Adv. Mr.Rojalin Pradhan, Adv. Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Perused the letter. Four weeks' time is allowed for filing rejoinder affidavit. List thereafter. [ Usha Bhardwaj ] [ Savita Sainani ] Court Master Court Master

ITEM NO.40 COURT NO.5 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010(From the judgement and order dated 02/07/2009 in LPA.No.1522/2004in SCA No.354/2004,02/07/2009 of The HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT ATAHMEDABAD)HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With prayer for interim relief and office report)WITH SLP(C) NO. 1305 of 2011(With office report)SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With appln.for c/delay in filing SLP and exemption from filing c/cof the impugned judgment and exemption from filing OT and officereport)SLP(C) NO. 9756 of 2011(With office report)Date: 11/11/2011 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. SATHASIVAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASTI CHELAMESWARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Hemal K. Sheth, Adv. Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Gaurav Agrawal, Adv. Mr. Siddarth Gupta, Adv. Mr. Shaiv Karan, Adv. Mr. Nachiketa JoshiFor Respondent(s) Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. Ms. Jesal, Adv. Mr. Suveni Banerjee, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Four weeks' time is allowed for filing counter affidavit. List thereafter. [ Usha Bhardwaj ] [ Savita Sainani ] Court Master Court Master

ITEM NO.23 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SUNIL THOMASPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report )WITH SLP(C) NO. 1305 of 2011(With office report)SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With office report)SLP(C) NO. 9756 of 2011(With office report)Date: 16/09/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Gaurav Agrawal Mr. Nachiketa JoshiFor Respondent(s) Ms.Suveni Banerjee,adv. Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent Nos.1-5 have not filed counter affidavit in spite of last chance granted. No further steps. Hence, place the matter before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. (Sunil Thomas) RegistrarSB

ITEM NO.22 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SUNIL THOMASPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report )WITH SLP(C) NO. 1305 of 2011(With office report)SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With office report)SLP(C) NO. 9756 of 2011(With office report)Date: 16/08/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. V. Santhana Lakshmi,Adv. Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv.For Respondent(s) Ms. Suveni Banerjee,Adv. Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service is complete. All the respondents granted four weeks time as a last chance for filing counter affidavit. List the matters on 16.9.2011 (SUNIL THOMAS)s Registrar

FITEM NO.43 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SUNIL THOMASPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report )WITH SLP(C) NO. 1305 of 2011(With office report)SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With office report)SLP(C) NO. 9756 of 2011(With office report)Date: 22/07/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv.For Respondent(s) Ms. Suveni Banerjee,Adv. Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service of notice is complete in all the matters. All the respondents granted four weeks time as a last chance for filing counter affidavit, if any. List the matters on 16.8.2011. (SUNIL THOMAS)s Registrar

,ITEM NO.36 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SUNIL THOMASPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report )WITH SLP(C) NO. 1305 of 2011(With office report)SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With office report)SLP(C) NO. 9756 of 2011(With office report)Date: 12/05/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv.For Respondent(s) Ms. Suveni Banerjee,Adv. Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Await return of notice of the unserved respondents in all the above cases. Served respondents are granted last opportunity for filing counter affidavit. List the matters on 22.7.2011. (SUNIL THOMAS)s Registrar

ØITEM NO.30 Court No.8 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).9756/2011(From the judgement and order dated 10/01/2011 in LPA No. 2902/2010in SCA No. 13513/2005 of The HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD)BHANUMATIBEN UMIYASHANKER JOSHI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and office report ))Date: 18/04/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.S. SIRPURKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKURFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Nachiketa Joshi,Adv. Mr. Chaitanya Joshi, Adv. Mr. Sudhakar Joshi, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice. Tag with SLP(C) No. 2324 of 2010. (Shashi Sareen) (Shashi Bala Vij) Court Master Court Master

fITEM NO.45 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SUNIL THOMASPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report )WITH SLP(C) NO. 1305 of 2011(With office report)SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With office report)Date: 07/04/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Gaurav Agrawal,Adv.For Respondent(s) Ms. Suveni Banerjee,Adv. Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Await return of notice of the unserved respondents in all the above cases. The served respondents granted four weeks time for filing counter affidavit. List the matters on 12.5.2011. (SUNIL THOMAS)s Registrar

æITEM NO.30 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SUNIL THOMASPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report )WITH SLP(C) NO. 1305 of 2011(With office report)SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With office report)Date: 04/03/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Gaurav AgrawalFor Respondent(s) Ms.Suveni Banerjee,adv. Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent No.1 is appeared through advocate Hemantika Wahi in all the cases. In SLP(C) No.8896/10 Ld.counsel for the petitioner is granted two weeks time as a last chance for remitting the process fee and spare copy for issuing notice to Respondent Nos.2-5. If steps are taken, issue notice. Await return of notice. Contd....2 ITEM NO.30 -2- In SLP(C) No.1305/11 await return of notice of all the respondents. Ld.counsel for the petitioner is granted four weeks time as a last chance for filing the proof of dasti. List the matter on 7.04.2011. (Sunil Thomas) RegistrarSB

bITEM NO.22 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SUNIL THOMASPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report )WITH SLP(C) NO. 1305 of 2011(With office report)SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With office report)Date: 31/01/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Gaurav Agrawal,Adv.For Respondent(s) Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. Ms. Bhawana T.,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In both the matters respondent No.1 appears through Mrs. Hemantika Wahi, advocate. Respondent No. 1 granted four weeks time as a last chance for filing counter affidavit. In SLP(C)No.8896/2010 counsel for the petitioner granted four weeks time as a last chance for taking fresh steps against respondent No. 2 to 5. If steps taken, issue notice. Await return of notice. ..2/- Item No.22 : 2 : In SLP(C)No.2324/2010 service of notice is complete. Vakalatnama not filed by the remaining respondents No representation for them also. List the matters on 4.3.2011 (SUNIL THOMAS)s Registrar

àITEM NO.17 Court No.8 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2010 CC 19955/2010(From the judgement and order dated 06/09/2010 in LPA No. 978/2010of The HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD)VINODBHAI TULSIBHAI RAIKUNDALIA Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report )Date: 07/01/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.S. SIRPURKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKURFor Petitioner(s) Mr.Gaurav Agrawal,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Issue notice. Tag with SLP(C) No. 8896 of 2010 [titled Ratilalbhai Jagmalbhai Parmar Vs. State of Gujarat and others ] (Pardeep Kumar) (Shashi Bala Vij) Court Master Court Master

\224ITEM NO.37 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SUNIL THOMASPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report )WITH SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With office report)Date: 16/12/2010 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Gaurav Agrawal,Av.For Respondent(s) Ms. Renuka Sahu,Adv. Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In SLP(C)No.8896/2010 it is seen that notice was issued to respondent No. 2 to 5 in April, 2010 and is still awaited. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to take fresh steps against respondent No. 2 to 5 by registered post, acknowledgment due within four weeks from today. If steps taken, issue notice. Await return of notice. Counsel for respondent No. 1 submits that she has filed Vakalatnama in both the matters but her name is not shown in the cause list. Update the data. List the matters on 31.1.2011. (SUNIL THOMAS)s Registrar

,ITEM NO.38 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SUNIL THOMASPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report )WITH SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With office report)Date: 25/11/2010 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Hemal K.Sheth,adv. Mr.Gaurav AgrawalFor Respondent(s) Ms. Hemantika Wahi UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In SLP(C) No.2324/10 Ld.counsel for the petitioner submitsthat dasti has been effected on Respondent No.5 and proof of dastihas been filed 10 days back. Office to verify and put up. In SLP(C) No.8896/10 Respondent No.1 has not filed counteraffidavit in spite of last opportunity granted. Await return ofnotice of Respondent Nos. 2-5. contd...2ITEM NO.38 -2- It is submitted by Mrs.Hemantika Wahi that she proposes toappear for Respondent State. Granted four weeks time for filingvakalatnama and counter affidavit. List the matter on 16.12.2010. (Sunil Thomas) RegistrarSB

ITEM NO.56 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SUNIL THOMASPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report )WITH SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With office report)Date: 30/09/2010 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. Hemal K. Sheth,Adv. Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Gaurav Agrawal,Adv.For Respondent(s) Ms. Renuka Sahu,Adv. Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Await return of notice of respondent No. 5. Counsel for the petitioner seeks dasti notice in addition to the notice already issued. Granted. Take steps within a week. Issue dasti notice. Await return of notice. List the matters on 25.11.2010. (SUNIL THOMAS)s Registrar

öITEM NO.56 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SUNIL THOMASPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report )WITH SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With office report)Date: 10/08/2010 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr.Hemal K.Sheth,Adv.For Respondent(s) Ms. Hemantika Wahi Ms.Renuka Sahu,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In SLP(C) No.2324/2010 Respondent No.5 has not been served.Petitioner is granted three weeks time for taking fresh steps byregistered post acknowledgment due. Issue fresh notice. Awaitreturn of notice of Respondent No.5. The served respondents havenot filed counter even though sufficient opportunity was granted.Hence no time is granted. contd....2 : 2 : In SLP(C) No.8896/10 Respondent No.1 is granted four weekstime as last chance for filing counter affidavit. Petitionersought for dasti by letter dated 12.07.10 against RespondentNos.2-5 in addition to notice already issued. Await return ofnotice of Respondent No.5. List the matter on 30.09.2010. (Sunil Thomas) RegistrarSB

¼ITEM NO.93 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SUNIL THOMASPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report )WITH SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With office report)Date: 07/07/2010 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Gaurav Agrawal Mr.Hemal Kr.Sheth,Addv.For Respondent(s) Ms.Hemantika Wahi,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Await return of notice of Respondent No.5 in SLP(C)No.2324/10 and Respondent Nos.2-5 in SLP(C) No.8896/10.Respondent No.1 is granted four weeks time for filing counteraffidavit in both the cases. List the matter on 10.08.2010. (Sunil Thomas) RegistrarSB

^ITEM NO.113 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR ASHOK MENONPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2324/2010HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report)WITH SLP(C) NO. 8896 of 2010(With office report)Date: 21/04/2010 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv. Mr.Gaurav Agrawal, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Await service of notice. List the matters on 07.07.2010. (Ashok Menon) RegistrarPS

TITEM NO.23 COURT NO.9 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2010 CC 2927/2010(From the judgement and order dated 02/07/2009 in LPA No. 1523/2004& SCA No. 17513/2003 of The HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD)RATILALBHAI JAGMALBHAI PARMAR Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)with I.A. No. 1 (c/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date: 15/03/2010 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.S. SIRPURKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKURFor Petitioner(s) Mr.Gaurav Agrawal,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice on the application for condonation of delay as well as on the special leave petition. Tag along with SLP(C) No. ....CC No. .. 21125/2009 (Shashi Sareen) (Shashi Bala Vij) Court Master Court Master

ITEM NO.24 COURT NO.10 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2009 CC 21125/2009(From the judgement and order dated 02/07/2009 in SCA No. 354/2004& LPA No. 1522/2004 of The HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD)HARIJAN PANIBEN DUDABHAI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)with I.A. No. 1 (c/delay in filing SLP and c/delay in refiling SLPand office report )Date: 04/01/2010 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.S. SIRPURKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE MUKUNDAKAM SHARMAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Hemal K.Sheth, Adv. Mr. A.Venayagam Balan,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Issue notice. (Shashi Sareen) (Shashi Bala Vij) Court Master Court Master

Search This Case

Indian Kanoon Google Scholar Google

Supreme Court Resources

SC Case Status by Diary Number Search by CNR Number Supreme Court of India Official SC Website (external)

High Court Case Status

Check case status for High Courts across India

Allahabad High Court

Uttar Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh High Court

Andhra Pradesh

Bombay High Court

Maharashtra

Calcutta High Court

West Bengal

Chhattisgarh High Court

Chhattisgarh

Delhi High Court

Delhi

Gauhati High Court

Assam

Gujarat High Court

Gujarat

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Himachal Pradesh

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Jammu & Kashmir

Jharkhand High Court

Jharkhand

Karnataka High Court

Karnataka

Kerala High Court

Kerala

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Madhya Pradesh

Madras High Court

Tamil Nadu

Manipur High Court

Manipur

Meghalaya High Court

Meghalaya

Orissa High Court

Odisha

Patna High Court

Bihar

Punjab & Haryana High Court

Punjab / Haryana / Chandigarh

Rajasthan High Court

Rajasthan

Sikkim High Court

Sikkim

Telangana High Court

Telangana

Tripura High Court

Tripura

Uttarakhand High Court

Uttarakhand