ORDER : N.V. Anjaria, J. 1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the request and consent of the parties appearing through their respective learned advocates, the petition was taken up for final consideration today. 1.1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Meet Thakkar waives service of Rule for the respondent State. 1.2. Heard learned advocate Ms. Sejal Mandvia for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader. 2. The petitioners have prayed for a direction against the respondents to grant them salary, pay scales and other monetary benefits from 1981. The petitioners want the court to further require the respondents to give the first higher pay scale with effect from 1.9.1990 by calculating 9 years of service from 1.9.1981. It is prayed to grant the financial benefits from 1.9.1981 which are granted to the other similarly situated persons with interest and to revise the pension. In this connection, the petitioners have also prayed to direct the respondent authorities to sanction the proposal made by the District Panchayat, Bharuch, on 25.10.2016. 3. The facts to be noticed are that the petitioner No. 1 was appointed on 15.9.1973 whereas the petitioner No. 2 came to be appointed with effect from 20.2.1978 in Survoday Scheme run by the respondents. The respondents decided to wind up the scheme. Instead of terminating the employees of the scheme, they were permanently allotted and absorbed in the Panchayat concerned. Both the petitioners accordingly came to be absorbed in the permanent establishment in the respondent Bharuch District Panchayat with effect from 1.4.1987. The post of the petitioner in the Panchayat was treated as ex-cader post. The petitioners worked continuously from 1981 to 1987. 3.1. The petitioners filed Special Civil Application No. 14172 of 2005 for getting pension for the entire period from 1981 to 1987 and clubbing the said services with the services under Panchayat. The petition was allowed and the period from 1981 to 1987 was treated to be continuous services for the purpose of pension. The petition was allowed on 4.8.2006. 3.2. It was submitted that despite above, the petitioners have been deprived of the pay scale of salary for the period from 1981 to 1987. The period of service of the petitioners, it was submitted, has not been counted from 1981 and the higher pay scale has also not been paid on such basis. The petition was allowed on 4.8.2006. 3.2. It was submitted that despite above, the petitioners have been deprived of the pay scale of salary for the period from 1981 to 1987. The period of service of the petitioners, it was submitted, has not been counted from 1981 and the higher pay scale has also not been paid on such basis. It was stated that representations were made to the authorities but did not yield any result. It was stated that similarly situated persons filed Special Civil Application No. 4023 of 2018 with similar prayers and succeed before this court. 3.3. The aforementioned communication dated 25.10.2016 from the District Development Officer, District Panchayat Bharuch, addressed to the under Secretary, Panchayat Rural and Housing Development Department, Gandhinagar, mentioned about the service details of the two petitioners to state that they were treated as ex-cadre employee with effect from 1.9.1981 in the Panchayat services from Sarvodaya scheme. The petitioners were granted pay scale and higher pay scale with effect from 1.4.1987. It was stated that since the petitioners were absorbed in the Panchayat services with effect from 1.9.1981, they would earn the first pay scale with effect from 1.9.1990 upon completion of 9 years of service. It was stated that in similar cases, the Finance Department had earlier given approval for counting the period of service for the Survodaya Yojana and the petitioners are required to be treated on the same lines. Another communication dated 15.6.2018 from the Panchayat Rural and Housing Development Department of the state government addressed to the District Development Officer, Bhavnagar, is also on record whereby the department has called for from the Panchayat the details of employees who were in the Survodaya scheme and whose services in the scheme were to be counted as continuous. 4. Similar issue was dealt with by this court in Daisy Kurian Kullampillil widow of Late K.K. Muraian vs. State of Gujarat being Special Civil Application No. 4023 of 2018 decided on 20.2.2019. Learned Assistant Government Pleader could not dispute the position of law emanating from the said judgment. 4.1. 4. Similar issue was dealt with by this court in Daisy Kurian Kullampillil widow of Late K.K. Muraian vs. State of Gujarat being Special Civil Application No. 4023 of 2018 decided on 20.2.2019. Learned Assistant Government Pleader could not dispute the position of law emanating from the said judgment. 4.1. This court in Daisy Kurian Kullampillil (supra), relied on the decision of this court in Balvantbhai M. Trivadi v. State of Gujarat being Special Civil Application No. 1270 of 2013 and allied matters decided as per judgment dated 3rd August, 2018 and quashed the circular dated 21.6.2012 whereby the period of ex-cadre services rendered in the Survoday Scheme was provided to be not reckoned for the purpose of counting of length of period of service of such employees for the purpose of benefit of higher pay scale etc. 4.2. Identical question came up for consideration in Pravinbhai Kantibhai Goseliya v. State of Gujarat being Special Civil Application No. 15970 of 2013 and allied matters decided as per order dated 07th December, 2018, in which the Court relied on the decision in Balvantbhai M. Trivadi (supra) and set aside the Circular to order the granting of benefit of higher pay-scale. After reproducing the observations and findings in paragraphs 11, 12, 13, 16, 17 and 18 from the decision in Bnalvantbhai M. Trivadi (supra), in Pravinbhai Kantibhai Goseliya (supra), the Court held as under. "7. In aforesaid set of circumstances, this group of petitions also is ordered to be disposed of on the similar line as has been broadly submitted before the Court. Accordingly, the impugned resolution dated 21.6.2012 is hereby quashed and set aside, with a further direction that amount of higher pay scale may not be recovered and the petitioner's case may be considered for grant of benefit of higher pay scale, as most of them have by-now retired. Since similar is the position, the decision which has to be taken by the respondent authority, shall be taken within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the writ of this Court for grant of higher pay scale as may be admissible on the basis of continuity of service counted from the original date of appointment and the respondent authority shall pass a reasoned order." 5. The ratio in Balvantbhai M. Trivadi (supra) and Pravinbhai Kantibhai Goseliya (supra) would apply in the facts of the present case. The ratio in Balvantbhai M. Trivadi (supra) and Pravinbhai Kantibhai Goseliya (supra) would apply in the facts of the present case. The petitioner stands entitled to be granted the relief. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to grant the first higher pay-scale to the petitioner by counting the period of service from the original date of appointment without taking into account the contemplation about not counting the ex-cadre post service in Circular dated 21st June, 2012 which is already set aside. The service period for the grant of second higher pay-scale shall also be counted from the initial date, that is 01st September, 1981, and the second higher pay-scale shall be extended to the petitioner provided the petitioner fulfills other requisite conditions to be entitled to the second higher pay-scale. 6. Accordingly, both the petitioners are entitled to relief as prayed for. The respondents are directed to grant the petitioners the salary and the pay scale and another monetary benefits from 1981. The respondents are further directed to give the first higher pay scale to the petitioner on 1.9.1990 by calculating requisite length of service of 9 years from 1.9.1981 and further higher pay scales benefits shall be reckoned for the petitioners accordingly. The respondents shall sanction the proposal for benefit to the petitioners accordingly and the pension of the petitioners shall also be revised with reference to the aforesaid benefit by taking into account the aforesaid benefits granted from 1981. 6.1. The arrears which may arise to be paid to the petitioners by virtue of the present order, shall be paid to each of the petitioners within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the present order. 7. The petition is allowed accordingly. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. Direct service is permitted.