Wilfred Jaques And 21 ORS., v. State Of Goa, Through Its Chief Secretary And ANR.,

1 W.P. No. 284/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

WRIT PETITION NO. 284 OF 2010 1.

Shri. Wilfred Jaques;

Shri. Socorro B. Fernandes;

3.

Shri. Bartolomeu Gomes;

4.

Shri. Vaman Govekar;

5.

Shoba P. Borkar;

6.

Neelam Nagvekar;

7.

Belinda D'Silva;

8.

Wilma Borges;

9.

Vera D'Costa;

10. Ortega Cardozo;

11. Shalan Gawade;

12. Bharti Narvekar;

13. Malini Sawant;

14. Agnelo L.F. Dias;

15. Swati Gaonkar;

16. Nirmala Bhandari;

17. Alice D'Silva;

18. Severina D'Costa;

19. Roshan P. Naik Gaonkar;

20. Kanchan Chari;

21. Serafina D'Melo;

22. Nazima Faleiro;

Presently working in E.S.I.

Hospital/Dispensary, Government of Goa, Margao - Goa.

...

Petitioners

Versus

2 W.P. No. 284/2010 1.

State of Goa, Through its Chief Secretary, Having Office at Secretariat, Porvorim - Goa.

The Commissioner of Employment, Government of Goa, having office at Shram Shakti Bhavan, Second Floor, Patto Plaza, Panaji - Goa.

...

Respondents Mr. D. Pangam with Mr. Parikshit Sawant, Advocates for the Petitioners.

Mr. Pravin N. Faldessai, Additional Government Advocate for the Respondent No.1.

Coram : R.D. Dhanuka, & Prithviraj K. Chavan, JJ.

Date : 29th March 2019.

ORAL JUDGMENT :

(Per R.D. Dhanuka, J.) :

Learned Counsel appearing for the parties, after perusing the Judgment of this Court delivered on 19.03.2019 in the case of Ashok B. Shetye Vs. State of Goa and Others in Writ Petition No. 616 of 2009, jointly state that the issues involved in this petition are directly covered by the said Judgment in the case of Ashok B. Shetye (supra). The statement is accepted.

3 W.P. No. 284/2010 Learned Counsel appearing for the parties jointly state that in view of this position, this Court is not required to record any reasons while disposing of this petition. Learned Counsel for the parties state that since the issues involved and the facts of this case are identical in Writ Petition No. 616 of 2009, the petition may be allowed in terms of prayer clause (A) and (B). This statement is accepted.

3.

In view of the aforesaid statement, we are not recording any reasons while passing this order. The Judgment of this Court in the case of Ashok B. Shetye (supra) applies to the facts of this case. 4.

Rule is accordingly made absolute in terms of prayer clause (A) and (B). The Respondents are directed to comply with this order within 12 weeks from today.

5.

Respondents to act on the authenticated copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

Prithviraj K. Chavan, J.

R.D. Dhanuka, J.

Dv*