Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/6095/2011 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6095 of 2011
=========================================================
ADESH
PAL - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY & 3 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
HJ NANAVATI for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR RASHESH RINDANI, LEARNED ASSISTANT
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1,
NOTICE SERVED for
Respondent(s) : 2 - 3.
MR AMIT M PANCHAL for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3.
MR NACHIKET A DAVE for Respondent(s) :
4,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HON'BLE
SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
Date
: 24/08/2011
ORAL
ORDER
Mr.H.J.Nanavati,
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to inadvertence,
respondent No.2-Vice Chancellor, Hemchandracharya North Gujarat
University is to be served through the Secretary to Her Excellency,
the Governer. He therefore, prays that he may be permitted to amend
the cause-title, as regards respondent No.2.
Permission
to do so, is granted. The necessary amendment be carried out,
forthwith.
Mr.H.J.Nanavati,
learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that as per
Section 19(1)(X) of the Hemchandracharya North Gujarat University
Act, 1986, Readers are to be nominated to the Executive Council by
rotation, in the manner prescribed by the Statutes. It is submitted
that Statute 65 is applicable to nomination of Professors and
Statute 65 would apply mutatis mutandis, for appointment of Readers
and the procedure prescribed in Statute 65 is to be followed.
Learned advocate for the petitioner has further submitted that by
applying the provisions of Statute 65, the University would have to
follow the process of rotation and the order of Professors in the
list would also have to be followed. The petitioner is next on the
list, after Dr.C.P.Bhasin, whose term has ended in March, 2011, and
in order of rotation on the list, his name should be considered for
nomination to the Executive Council. Instead, respondent No.4, whose
name is at Serial No.5 of the list has been considered and
appointed.
Mr.Amit
M. Panchal, learned advocate for respondents No.2 and 3 has
submitted that respondent No.4 was appointed as Reader during the
tenure of Dr.C.P.Bhasin, whose name was at Serial No.1 of the list.
As respondent No.4 had not got a chance to be nominated as Member of
the Executive Council, and the petitioner had already served as
Member of the Council once, the name of respondent No.4 has rightly
been considered, in accordance with the provisions of the Act and
Statute.
Mr.Nachiket
A. Dave, learned advocate for respondent No.4 has submitted that the
name of respondent No.4 was considered and he was appointed, as he
is the only candidate who had not got a chance of being nominated to
the Executive Council, therefore, his appointment is justified.
Having
heard learned advocates for the respective parties and upon perusal
of the relevant provisions of the Act and Statutes, it appears that
the matter requires deeper consideration.
Hence,
Rule, returnable on 30.09.2011. Mr.Rashesh Rindani, learned
Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of Rule for
respondent No.1, Mr.Amit M. Panchal, learned advocate waives service
of notice of Rule for respondents Nos.2 and 3 and Mr.Nachiket A.
Dave, learned advocate waives service of notice of Rule for
respondent No.4.
[SMT.
ABHILASHA KUMARI, J.]
..mitesh..
Top