High Court of Gujarat
CHHAGANBHAI BARUKBHAI GANVITversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Decided
- Disposal
- 56-DISPOSED AT ADMISSION STAGE
- Bench
- NIRZAR S DESAI
Holding
The High Court held that, without examining the merits, it would allow the petitioners to make a fresh representation and direct the respondent to decide it within a prescribed period, in line with the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling.
Summary
The petitioners, Chhaganbhai Barukbai Ganvit & Ors., filed a special civil application seeking a one‑increment increase in their pension, revision of retirement benefits and payment of arrears with interest, relying on a Supreme Court decision dated 20‑Feb‑2025. They also requested that the respondents decide a fresh representation within a stipulated time. The High Court, noting that the matter is covered by the Supreme Court ruling in Union of India & Another v. M. Siddaraj, declined to examine the merits and instead directed the petitioners to make their representation within two weeks. The Court further ordered Respondent No.1 to decide the representation within three months, to follow the Supreme Court decision, and to issue a reasoned order if adverse. No merits were adjudicated and the petition was disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court should direct the respondents to grant the pension increment and arrears without examining the merits of the petition.
- Whether the petitioners may be permitted to make a fresh representation and the respondents be bound to decide it within a time‑frame in accordance with the Supreme Court’s earlier decision.
Subjects
- pension
- increment
- arrears
- fresh representation
- time‑bound order
- Supreme Court decision
- administrative law
Judgment
C/SCA/2078/2026 ORDER DATED: 19/02/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2078 of 2026
==========================================================
CHHAGANBHAI BARUKBHAI GANVIT & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance :
MR HB SINGH for the Petitioners.
MR MITUL GAUTAM, AGP for the Respondents.
=========================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 19/02/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of this petition, the petitioners have prayed to
direct the respondents to grant bene't of one increment to the
petitioners as per their entitlement and consequentially, direct
respondent authorities to revise the pension and other retirement
bene'ts to the petitioners and make the payment of arrears with
interest. The petitioners have also prayed to direct the
respondents to decide the fresh representation in the stipulated
time for one increment as per the order dated 20.2.2025 passed by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
2. At the outset, learned advocate Mr. H. B. Singh states,
under instructions, that at this juncture, as the issue is covered by
the decision dated 20.2.2025 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
delivered in Misc. Application Diary No.2400 of 2024 in Civil
Appeal No.3933 of 2023 in the case of Union of India and another
v. M. Siddaraj and as the petitioners also intend to make fresh
representation to the respondents, the respondents may be
directed to decide the said representation within some time bound
Page 1 of 2
C/SCA/2078/2026 ORDER DATED: 19/02/2026
schedule, without examining the merits of the matter.
3. In view of the above submission, without examining the
merits of the matter, the petitioners are permitted to make
representation to the respondent authorities within a period of two
weeks from today and once the said representation is received by
the respondents, more particularly the respondent No.1, the
respondent No.1 is directed to decide the said representation in
accordance with law keeping in mind the decision dated
20.2.2025 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered in Misc.
Application Diary No.2400 of 2024 in Civil Appeal No.3933 of
2023 in the case of Union of India and another v. M.
Siddaraj. In case if any adverse order is to be passed by the
respondent No.1, the respondent No.1 is directed to pass a
reasoned order and communicate the said order to the petitioners
by way of RPAD. The respondent No.1 is also directed to decide
the said representation of the petitioners within a period of three
months from the date of receipt thereof.
4. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the
present petition stands disposed of. It is made clear that this Court
has not examined the merits of the case.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
SAVARIYA
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: RAJNISH NARENDRA SAVARIYA(HC00179), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 19/02/2026 15:00:13
Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.