JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Mr. Vishal P. Thakker, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Premal R. Joshi, learned advocate appearing for the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3, Ms. Suman Motla, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent No.4 – State. 2. By way of the present petition, petitioner herein has prayed for grant of the benefits as per the government resolution dated 17.10.1988, the petitioner having completed 10 years of service from the actual date of joining of services and has further prayed to set aside the act of the respondents in granting the arrears as per the cut-off date of 29.10.2010. 3. The petitioner herein by way of the present petition invoking Article-226 of the Constitution of India, has prayed for the following reliefs: “(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to allow this Special Civil Application, in the interest of justice; (B) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus, or a writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, to the respondents to grant the benefits of Govt. Resolution dtd. 17.10.1988 to the petitioner from completion of 10 years from the actual date of his joining the service, and thereby quash and set aside the act of the respondents of granting the arrears as per the cut off date of 29.10.2010, which issue has been dealt with by this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice and equity; (C) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus, or a writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, to the respondents to grant the benefits of Govt. Resolution dtd. 17.10.1988 to the petitioner from completion of 10 years from the actual date of his joining the service, and thereby quash and set aside the act of the respondents of granting the arrears as per the cut off date of 29.10.2010, which issue has been dealt with by this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice and equity, pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition; (D) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to grant interest @ 18% p.a for delay of payment of such arrears in the interest of Justice; (E) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to grant such other and further reliefs as deemed fit in the interest of Justice.” 4.1. Briefly stated that, the petitioner herein came to be appointed as Rojamdar Peon (daily wager) since 09.04.1983. The services of the petitioner came to be terminated in the year 1990. The petitioner was the original petitioner of Reference Case No. 1799 of 1988 before the Labour Court, Amreli, Reference Case No. 130 of 1993 before the Labour Court, Bhavnagar and Reference Case No. 69 of 1998 before the Labour Court, Amreli, wherein, the learned Labour Court, Amreli allowed the Reference, ordering the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service with the cost of Rs.651/-. The said award was the subject matter of challenge by filing Special Civil Application No. 4427 of 2000, which came to be rejected vide order dated 30.07.2001. In view thereof, the said award passed by the learned Labour Court has attained finality. The petitioner herein came to be reinstated on 03.03.2003. 4.2. The petitioner herein preferred Special Civil Application No. 9133 of 2016, seeking regularization, which came to be dismissed by order dated 15.06.2016. The present petition is filed for the limited purpose that while the petitioner herein is extended the benefits of the government resolution dated 17.10.1988, the cut-off date of 29.10.2010 is not applicable to the Panchayat employees. 5.1. Mr. Vishal P. Thakker, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, at the outset, has placed reliance on the order passed in Special Civil Application No. 14198 of 2020 dated 01.05.2024, wherein, the said Special Civil Application came to be allowed, directing the respondent authority to grant the benefits of the government resolution dated 17.10.1988, without reference of the cut-off date of 29.10.2010, whereby, the reliance was placed on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1381 of 2015 dated 04.01.2016 and also the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Gujarat Vs. PWD Employees Union & Ors., reported in 2013 (12) SCC 417 . 5.2. Mr. Vishal P. Thakker, learned advocate has also placed on record the order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench dated 06.09.2024 in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1370 of 2024, wherein, the appeal filed by the Amreli District Panchayat, against the order passed in SCA No. 14198 of 2020, came to be dismissed. 5.3. In light of the aforesaid, Mr. 5.2. Mr. Vishal P. Thakker, learned advocate has also placed on record the order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench dated 06.09.2024 in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1370 of 2024, wherein, the appeal filed by the Amreli District Panchayat, against the order passed in SCA No. 14198 of 2020, came to be dismissed. 5.3. In light of the aforesaid, Mr. Vishal P. Thakker, learned advocate, submitted that the prayers as prayed for, in the present petition, be allowed, in light of the fact that the petitioner herein being identically placed to the petitioners of Special Civil Application No. 14198 of 2020, wherein, the learned Labour Court has passed the award of reinstatement with continuity of service qua the present petitioner, as also Mariyamben Kalabhai Sarvaiya (petitioner of SCA No. 14198 of 2020) and the said issue is settled, wherein, against the said order of SCA, the LPA stands dismissed, vide order dated 06.09.2024. 6. Mr. Premal Joshi, learned advocate appearing for the respondent nos. 1 to 3 – authorities is not in a position to controvert the aforesaid position of law, as relied upon, by Mr. Vishal P. Thakker, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner. 7. Ms. Suman Motla, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent no.4 – State also is not in a position to controvert the aforesaid position of law, as referred herein-above. 8. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, it is apposite to refer to the order passed in Special Civil Application No. 14198 of 2020, the relevant paras-5 to 7 reads thus: “5. Having regard to such a position, observations of the Hon’ble Division Bench in decision dated 04.01.2016 in Letters Patent Appeal No.1381/2015 more particularly at paragraph nos.4 and 5 being relevant, are reproduced hereinbelow for benefit:- “4. If the facts of the present case are considered, the Labour Court has passed the award by directing to grant the benefits available to the respective workmen as per the Govt. Resolution dated 17.10.1988. The learned single Judge, in view of the above-referred decision of the Apex Court in the case of State of Gujarat & others (supra) did not find the case for interference. Mr. Munshaw is not right in submitting that the effect for permanency benefits etc. Resolution dated 17.10.1988. The learned single Judge, in view of the above-referred decision of the Apex Court in the case of State of Gujarat & others (supra) did not find the case for interference. Mr. Munshaw is not right in submitting that the effect for permanency benefits etc. is to be given from 29.10.2010 as per the above-referred decision of the Apex Court in the case of State of Gujarat & others (supra). On the contrary, in paragraph-29 of the said decision, the Apex Court has observed, inter alia, that, “considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the finding of the Gujarat High Court dated 29.10.2010 in PWD Employees Union v. State of Gujarat and connected matters and the fact that the said judgment is binding between the parties, we are of the view that the appellants should be directed to grant the benefit of the scheme as contained in the Resolution dated 17.10.1988 to all the daily-wage workers of the Forest and Environment Department working for more than five years, providing them the benefits as per our finding at para 29 above. The appellants are directed accordingly.” Entire paragraph-29 of the above referred decision of the Apex Court reads as under: “29. As per the scheme contained in the Resolution dated 17-10-1988 all the daily-wage workers were not entitled for regularization or permanency in the services. As per the said Resolution the daily wagers are entitled to the following benefits: “(i) They are entitled to daily wages as per the prevailing daily wages. If there is presence of more than 240 days in first year, daily wagers are eligible for paid Sunday, medical allowance and national festival holidays. (ii) Daily wagers and semi-skilled workers who have service of more than five years and less than 10 years are entitled for fixed monthly salary along with dearness allowance as per prevailing standard, for his working days. Such daily wagers will get two optional leaves in addition to 14 miscellaneous leaves, Sunday leave and national festival holidays. Such daily wagers will also be eligible for getting medical allowance and deduction of provident fund. (iii) Daily wagers and semi-skilled workers who have service of more than ten years but less than 15 years are entitled to get minimum pay scale on a par with skilled workers along with dearness allowance as per prevailing standard, for his working days. Such daily wagers will also be eligible for getting medical allowance and deduction of provident fund. (iii) Daily wagers and semi-skilled workers who have service of more than ten years but less than 15 years are entitled to get minimum pay scale on a par with skilled workers along with dearness allowance as per prevailing standard, for his working days. Moreover, such daily wagers will get two optional leaves in addition to 14 miscellaneous leaves, Sunday leave and national festival holidays. He/She will be eligible for getting medical allowance and deduction of provident fund. (iv) Daily wagers and semi-skilled workers who have service of more than 15 years will be considered as permanent worker and such semiskilled workers will get current pay scale of skilled worker along with dearness allowance, local city allowance and house rent allowance. They will get benefit as per the prevailing rules of gratuity, retired (sic retiral) salary, general provident fund. Moreover, they will get two optional leaves in addition to 14 miscellaneous leaves, 30 days’ earned leave, 20 days’ half pay leave, Sunday leave and national festival holidays. The daily wage workers and semiskilled workers who have completed more than 15 years of their service will get one increment, two increments for 20 years service and three increments for 25 years in the current pay scale of skilled workers and their salary will be fixed accordingly.” Hence, what is ordered by the Apex Court is grant of benefits as per the Govt. Resolution dated 17.10.1988 and not from the date as sought to be canvassed by the learned counsel for the appellant so as to deprive the benefits, if any, of the Govt. Resolution dated 17.10.1988. 5. Be it recorded that so far as the present case is concerned, the respondent no.1 is the workman in District Panchayat and in respect of the Panchayat employees, the policy of the government applies automatically which means that they are at par with the government employees. The status of the employees of Gujarat Water Supply & Sewege Board of whose matter reference is made by Mr. Munshaw cannot be said to be at par with the Panchayat employees. We leave it at that because the matter is pending before the Apex Court in the above-referred proceedings of Special Leave Petitions.” 6. The status of the employees of Gujarat Water Supply & Sewege Board of whose matter reference is made by Mr. Munshaw cannot be said to be at par with the Panchayat employees. We leave it at that because the matter is pending before the Apex Court in the above-referred proceedings of Special Leave Petitions.” 6. Considering the observations made by the Hon’ble Division Bench more particularly whereby the Hon’ble Division Bench has confirmed the decision of the learned Single Judge more particularly with regard to conferment of benefits under Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 without any reference to the cut off date of 29.10.2010, in the considered opinion of this Court, the petition is required to be allowed. Hence, the following directions are passed:- (i) The respondents are directed to reconsider the case of the late employee for grant of benefit under Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 without any reference to the cut off date of 29.10.2010. (ii) Such reconsideration would be done by the respondents within a period of ten weeks from the date of receipt of this order. (iii) After such reconsideration, the respondents shall forward an appropriate proposal to the newly joined respondent no.4 for grant of all benefits as the late employee may be entitled to and whereas the respondent no.4 shall ensure that the benefits are paid to the petitioners within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of such proposal. 7. With the above directions, the present petition stands disposed of as allowed.” 9. The order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1370 of 2024 dated 06.09.2024, relevant paras 1 to 5 reads thus: “1. This intra Court appeal is directed against the order dated 01.05.2024 in Special Civil Application No. 14198 of 2020, wherein learned Single Judge while disposing of the petition has directed the appellant – Amreli District Panchayat (original respondent) to reconsider the case of late employee for grant of benefit under Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 without any reference to the cutoff date of 29.10.2010. 2. The facts on record are not in dispute. It was case of the respondent – original petitioner that appellant – Amreli District Panchayat by an order dated 21.09.2020, had illegally denied the benefits conferred under Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988, by not counting her length of service. 2. The facts on record are not in dispute. It was case of the respondent – original petitioner that appellant – Amreli District Panchayat by an order dated 21.09.2020, had illegally denied the benefits conferred under Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988, by not counting her length of service. The application of cut of date of 29.10.2010, for grant of benefit of G.R dated 17.10.1988, being erroneous deserves reconsideration. It was case of the respondent – employee that she had rendered services from 04.04.1981 as a daily wager and therefore upon completion of her 10 years services, she would be entitled to benefit under Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988. She was working with the appellant since 04.04.1981, as a Rojamdar Peon and thereafter she was illegally terminated on 04.04.1990. For her termination, she raised a dispute before the Labour Court Rajkot, registered as Reference Case No. 191 of 1993, wherein the Labour Court allowed the reference and directed reinstatement with continuity of service. Aggrieved by the award of the Labour Court, a writ petition being Special Civil Application No. 4441 of 2000 came to be filed by Amreli District Panchayat, which came to be rejected and upon rejection of Special Civil Application No. 4441 of 2000, the respondent herein was reinstated vide order dated 03.03.2003. In view of her reinstatement, she would be entitled to benefits of G.R dated 17.10.1988, by counting total length of service. As she was denied the benefits of Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 by counting her total length of service and in view of grant of benefits of G.R. dated 17.10.1988, by applying cut of date, she preferred captioned writ petition. The learned Single Judge by placing reliance on Letters Patent Appeal No. 1381 of 2015 allowed the petition, aggrieved by which present appeal is filed. 3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Kaash Thakkar for the appellant and learned advocate Mr. Vishal Thakker for respondent Nos. 1.1 and 1.2 and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Shruti Dhruve for respondent – State. 4. Learned advocate Mr. Kaash Thakkar fairly submitted that the order dated 21.09.2020 was passed granting benefits of G.R dated 17.10.1988, to the respondent herein from 29.10.2010, because the said cut of date was given in the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Gujarat Vs. PWD Employees Union and Ors. reported in ( 2013 (12) SCC 417 . Kaash Thakkar fairly submitted that the order dated 21.09.2020 was passed granting benefits of G.R dated 17.10.1988, to the respondent herein from 29.10.2010, because the said cut of date was given in the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Gujarat Vs. PWD Employees Union and Ors. reported in ( 2013 (12) SCC 417 . However, the said issue is now no more res-integra in view of decision of the Coordinate Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1381 of 2015, wherein the Coordinate Bench has held as under: - “4. If the facts of the present case are considered, the Labour Court has passed the award by directing to grant the benefits available to the respective workmen as per the Govt. Resolution dated 17.10.1988. The learned single Judge, in view of the above-referred decision of the Apex Court in the case of State of Gujarat & others (supra) did not find the case for interference. Mr. Munshaw is not right in submitting that the effect for permanency benefits etc. is to be given from 29.10.2010 as per the above-referred decision of the Apex Court in the case of State of Gujarat & others (supra). On the contrary, in paragraph 29 of the said decision, the Apex Court has observed, inter alia, that, “considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the finding of the Gujarat High Court dated 29.10.2010 in PWD Employees Union v. State of Gujarat and connected matters and the fact that the said judgment is binding between the parties, we are of the view that the appellants should be directed to grant the benefit of the scheme as contained in the Resolution dated 17.10.1988 to all the daily-wage workers of the Forest and Environment Department working for more than five years, providing them the benefits as per our finding at para 29 above. The appellants are directed accordingly.” Entire paragraph-29 of the above referred decision of the Apex Court reads as under: “29. As per the scheme contained in the Resolution dated 17-10-1988 all the daily-wage workers were not entitled for regularization or permanency in the services. As per the said Resolution the daily wagers are entitled to the following benefits: “(i) They are entitled to daily wages as per the prevailing daily wages. As per the scheme contained in the Resolution dated 17-10-1988 all the daily-wage workers were not entitled for regularization or permanency in the services. As per the said Resolution the daily wagers are entitled to the following benefits: “(i) They are entitled to daily wages as per the prevailing daily wages. If there is presence of more than 240 days in first year, daily wagers are eligible for paid Sunday, medical allowance and national festival holidays. (ii) Daily wagers and semi-skilled workers who have service of more than five years and less than 10 years are entitled for fixed monthly salary along with dearness allowance as per prevailing standard, for his working days. Such daily wagers will get two optional leaves in addition to 14 miscellaneous leaves, Sunday leave and national festival holidays. Such daily wagers will also be eligible for getting medical allowance and deduction of provident fund. (iii) Daily wagers and semi-skilled workers who have service of more than ten years but less than 15 years are entitled to get minimum pay scale on a par with skilled workers along with dearness allowance as per prevailing standard, for his working days. Moreover, such daily wagers will get two optional leaves in addition to 14 miscellaneous leaves, Sunday leave and national festival holidays. He/She will be eligible for getting medical allowance and deduction of provident fund. (iv) Daily wagers and semi-skilled workers who have service of more than 15 years will be considered as permanent worker and such semi-skilled workers will get current pay scale of skilled worker along with dearness allowance, local city allowance and house rent allowance. They will get benefit as per the prevailing rules of gratuity, retired (sic retiral) salary, general provident fund. Moreover, they will get two optional leaves in addition to 14 miscellaneous leaves, 30 days’ earned leave, 20 days’ half pay leave, Sunday leave and national festival holidays. The daily-wage workers and semiskilled workers who have completed more than 15 years of their service will get one increment, two increments for 20 years service and three increments for 25 years in the current pay scale of skilled workers and their salary will be fixed accordingly.” Hence, what is ordered by the Apex Court is grant of benefits as per the Govt. Resolution dated 17.10.1988 and not from the date as sought to be canvassed by the learned counsel for the appellant so as to deprive the benefits, if any, of the Govt. Resolution dated 17.10.1988. 5. Be it recorded that so far as the present case is concerned, the respondent no.1 is the workman in District Panchayat and in respect of the Panchayat employees, the policy of the government applies automatically which means that they are at par with the government employees. The status of the employees of Gujarat Water Supply & Sewege Board of whose matter reference is made by Mr. Munshaw cannot be said to be at par with the Panchayat employees. We leave it at that because the matter is pending before the Apex Court in the above-referred proceedings of Special Leave Petitions. 6. The Labour Court has directed for conferment of benefits by the impugned award as per the Govt. Resolution dated 17.10.1988. We do not find that the learned single Judge has committed any error in not interfering with the said award. Under the circumstances, no case is made out for interference. Hence, the appeal is dismissed.” 5. In view of the decision of the Coordinate Bench referred herein above, we could not see any reason for interference and therefore the present appeal is rejected.” 10. In light of the aforesaid ratio and the facts of the present case, as referred above, the petitioner herein is identically placed to the petitioner of Special Civil Application No. 14198 of 2020, wherein, in the said case, the Labour Court, Amreli, by order dated 03.12.1999, has directed reinstatement with continuity of service alongwith back-wages, which has attained finality. The petitioner herein was also one of the applicants in the said Reference and is identically placed with the said subject matter of challenge by filing SCA No. 14198 of 2020, which came to be dismissed by order dated 01.05.2024, wherein, it is held concurrently that, while conferring the benefits under the government resolution dated 17.10.1988, the benefits of the government resolution dated 17.10.1988 be considered without reference to the cut-off date of 29.10.2010 and that the cut-off date of 29.10.2010 is not applicable to the panchayat employees. Further, the LPA preferred by Amreli District Panchayat also came to be dismissed by the Hon’ble Division Bench vide order dated 06.09.2024 passed in LPA No. 1370 of 2024. 11. Further, the LPA preferred by Amreli District Panchayat also came to be dismissed by the Hon’ble Division Bench vide order dated 06.09.2024 passed in LPA No. 1370 of 2024. 11. In view of the aforesaid undisputed facts as referred above and the ratio as laid down by the Hon’ble Division Bench, the prayers as prayed for, in the present petition are required to be allowed and the same are allowed accordingly. The respondent authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioner, in terms of directions issued in Para-6 of Special Civil Application No. 14198 of 2020. This Court deems it fit to reproduce the same, for the sake of convenience, which reads thus: 6. Considering the observations made by the Hon’ble Division Bench more particularly whereby the Hon’ble Division Bench has confirmed the decision of the learned Single Judge more particularly with regard to conferment of benefits under Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 without any reference to the cut off date of 29.10.2010, in the considered opinion of this Court, the petition is required to be allowed. Hence, the following directions are passed:- (i) The respondents are directed to reconsider the case of the late employee for grant of benefit under Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 without any reference to the cut off date of 29.10.2010. (ii) Such reconsideration would be done by the respondents within a period of ten weeks from the date of receipt of this order. (iii) After such reconsideration, the respondents shall forward an appropriate proposal to the newly joined respondent no.4 for grant of all benefits as the late employee may be entitled to and whereas the respondent no.4 shall ensure that the benefits are paid to the petitioners within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of such proposal. 12. The aforesaid exercise be undertaken, preferably within a period of 10 weeks from the date of the receipt of the order. Once the aforesaid decision is taken, all consequential benefits that arise, out of the order passed in the present petition, be paid to the petitioner. 13. For the forgoing reasons, the present Petition stands ALLOWED. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.