IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6289 of 2025 ===================================================== VALLABHBHAI MERVANBHAI PATEL & ORS. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. ===================================================== Appearance: MR HB SINGH(2073) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 MR HENIL SHAH ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4 ===================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI Date : 16/03/2026 ORAL ORDER 1. By way of this petition, the petitioners have prayed to direct the respondents to grant benefit of one increment to the petitioners as per their entitlement and consequentially, direct respondent authorities to revise the pension and other retirement benefits 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 p. 2 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 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 p. 3 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) Pallavi