K. M. Thaker, J. - (1.) Heard Mr.Rathod, learned advocate for the petitioner and Ms.Joshi, learned AGP for the respondents.
(2.) In present petition, the petitioner has prayed, inter alia, that: "14B. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an order, writ in the nature of mandamus and/or certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or directions for to direct the Respondent Authorities to pay all the retirement benefits as per Govt. Resolution dated 17.10.1988 i.e. the amount of Gratuity, Pension, Leave Encashment, 6th Pay Commission to the petitioner with 9% interest and be further quash and set aside the order dated 12.05.014 passed by the Deputy Executive Engineer, Halvad (At Annexure-F to this petition) in the interest of justice."
(3.) The limited grievance of the petitioner is that though he has been granted benefits flowing from the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 and though he fulfills terms and conditions prescribed by the said Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988, any retiral benefits viz. gratuity, pension, difference of salary on the basis of recommendations of 6th Pay Commission, leave encashment, etc. are not paid only on the ground that he joined the service after 1988 (i.e. the date of eligibility prescribed under Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988). 3.1 So as to support and justify the claim for retiral benefits, the petitioner has averred and stated that: "3.1 The petitioner was appointed as Daily wager employee with the Respondents in the year of 1985. The petitioner had continuously worked with the Respondents. Though, without any reasons and justification, the service of the present petitioner was orally terminated by the Respondents on dated. 25.02.1991. Therefore, being aggrieved and dissatisfied from the termination, the present petitioner had approached to the Labour Court, Surendranagar by way of preferring Reference (LCS) No. 242/1991. During the pendency of the reference before the Labour Court, the Respondents had reinstated the petitioner on dated. 09.11.1992. Therefore, the Labour Court has passed an award on dated. 06.09.1993, whereby, question of reinstatement does not arised because the petitioner was in service and therefore, 70% back wages of interim period ie. date of termination to date of reinstatement was granted by the Labour Court. The copy of award dated. 06.09.1993 passed by the Labour Court, Surendranagar in Reference (LCS) NO. 242/1991 is annexed herein and marked as Annexure A' to this petition. 3.2 The petitioner states that, thereafter, after completion of five years of continuous service, the Respondents has granted the benefits of Govt. Resolution dated. 17.10.1988 by the Respondent No. 3 herein, wherein, the petitioner was made Work charge Labourer and Rs. 750/- fix salary and other benefits as per Govt. Resolution has been granted by order dated. 11.11.1997. Theneafter, the Respondents had again granted the benefits of Govt. Resolution dated. 17.10.1988 after completion of ten years continuous service in the pay grade of Rs. 2550-3200 by way of order dated. 31.01.2003. The copy of Govt. Resolution dated. 17.10.1988 is annexed herein and marked as Annexure-"B' to this petition. The copy of order dated. 11.11.1997 is annexed herein and marked as Annexure- 'C' to this petition. The copy of order dated. 31.03.2003 is annexed herein and marked as Annexure- "D' to this petition. 3.3 Thenafter, the present petitioner was retired from service w.e.f. 31.03.2014. The Respondents has only paid the amount of Provident Funds, and rest of the retirement dues are not paid by the Respondents till date. The petitioner had put almost 29 years continuous service with the Respondents. Not only that, the Respondents had granted the benefits of Govt. Resolution dated. 17.10.1988 in favour of the petitioner, though, retirement benefits not given to the petitioner. 3.4 The petitioner had made representation on dated. 24.01.2014 to the Respondent No.4 and requested that, kindly grant Pension in his favour. The Respondent No. 4 had replied the petitioner vide reply dated. 12.05.2014 and because of only one reason that, his appointment was made after 01.10.1988 and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for the benefits of Pension. The copy of representation dated. 24.01.2014 is annexed herein and marked as Annexure-'E to this petition. The Copy of Reply dated. 12.05.2014 is annexed herein and marked as Annexure-F' to this petition. 3.5 The petitioner further state that, the petitioner was getting the benefits of 5th pay commission, but the Respondents has not granted the benefits of 6th pay commission to the present petitioner till the date of his retirement. The petitioner had made several request to the Respondents, but not considered it. Therefore, the petitioner had made representation on dated. 05.02.2014 to the Respondent No.4 Deputy Executive Engineer, Halvad for getting the benefits of 6th pay commission, but till date it is not given to the petitioner. The copy of representation dated. 05.02.2014 is annexed herein and marked as Annexure- C: to this petition. 3.6 The petitioner further states that, thenafter, the petitioner had served legal notice on dated. 16.10.2014 to the present Respondents. Wherein, it is categoricaly mentioned that, the Respondent Authority had acted in discriminatory manner amongst the one class of employees. The Respondents had granted the benefits of pension in favour of other two co- employees of the petitioner namely Mr. Laxmanbhai Ramabhai Danger who was appointed on 02.12.1988 and retired from service on dated. 30.09.2011 and Mr. Ajitsinh Prabhatsinh Parmar who was appointed on 19.11.1988 and retired from service on dated. 31.01.2010. The Respondents had extended granted the benefits of pension in favour of both the employees but it is not extended in favour of the petitioner. The copy of legal notice dated. 16.10.2014 along with acknowledgments are annexed herein and marked as Annexure -'H' (Colly) to this petition. 3.7 The Respondent No. 4 Deputy Executive Engineer, Halvad had replied it vide Reply dated. 05.11.2014 to the advocate that, in the other case of Late Shri. Bhikhubhai Govindbhai Raval, the Director of Pension and Provident Fund, Gandhinagar has rejected an application for pension, and therefore, the petitioner is also not entitled for Pension Benefits. The petitioner states that, the Respondents has not replied the important aspect about two similar situated employees has been granted benefits of Pension. The copy of reply dated. 05.11.2014 is annexed herein and marked as Annexure-I'to this petition. 3.8 The petitioner states that, thenafter, the Respondent No. 5 Director of Pension and Provident Funds, Gandhinagar had replied the said legal notice vide reply dated. 27.11.2014 and categorically stated that, this office is not having powers for granting the benefits of Pension. The copy of reply dated. 27.11.2014 is annexed herein and marked as Annexure-J' to this petition. 3.9 Thenafter, again, the petitioner had served another legal notice dated. 24.03.2015 to the Respondent No. 4 Deputy Executive engineer, Halvad with clarification that, the case of the present petitioner is similar to Mr. Laxmanbhai Ramabhai Danger who was appointed on 02.12.1988 and retired from service on dated. 30.09.2011 and Mr. Ajitsinh Prabhatsinh Parmar who was appointed on 19.11.1988 and retired from service on dated. 31.01.2010 and not similar to Late Shri. Bhikhubhai Govindbhai Raval, therefore, again, requested to grant benefits of pension, leave encashment, gratuity etc. But the respondent has not replied the same, and therefore, the petitioner is constrained to file present petition.;