Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/3287/2010 2/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3287 of 2010
=========================================================
DILIP
RAJABHAI VADHER - Petitioner(s)
Versus
COMMISSIONER
RAJKOT MAHANAGAR SEWA SADAN - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
RAMNANDAN SINGH for
Petitioner(s) : 1,MS ABHA B MAKWANA for Petitioner(s) : 1,
NOTICE
SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1,
MR RM CHHAYA for Respondent(s)
: 1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 05/04/2010
ORAL
ORDER
By way of this petition the
petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the order dated
26.8.2009 and for a direction to reinstate the petitioner on his
original post with all consequential benefits.
The brief facts of the case
are as under :-
2.1
An advertisement was published by the respondent for the post of
Assistant Manager in the month of August 2007. Pursuant to the said
advertisement, the petitioner had applied and he has appeared
before the selection committee on 24.2.2008.
2.2
The petitioner was selected and was placed at the Sr. no. 5 in the
selection list and ultimately he was selected.
2.3 The
services of the petitioner came to be terminated by order dated
26.8.2009. The petitioner made several representations, but no reply
was given. Hence this petition.
Heard learned advocates for
the respective parties and perused the documents on record.
The respondent had filed
reply to the petition . In paras 6 and 7 it is stated as under:
6. I say and submit that
the post of Assistant Manager is an important post of middle level
management and is an important post in the organization of the
respondent corporation and therefore the assistant manager is not
appointed for a particular department but has to perform work as
assistant manager in different department as per the exigencies. I
say and submit that the applications filed by the petitioner after
completion of his contract dated 7.9.2009 and 8.10.2009 have been
duly considered by the highest authority of the corporation.
7. I say and submit that,
earlier the post of assistant managers were directed to be filled in
on fixed pay basis on contract and accordingly as said earlier the
petitioner was so appointed. And as per the contract which has come
to an end the petitioner has been relieved. I say and submit that
the respondent corporation has therefore acted in accordance in law.
It is denied that, the order dated 26.8.2009 is arbitrary. I further
say and submit that the initial appointment of the petitioner on
contract on various conditions and on expiry of the period of
contract the order at ANNEXURE A is passed. I therefore say and
submit that no reason is necessary to be given. I say and submit
that the grounds raised in the petition are no germane to the
condition and contract of service and is not applicable in case of
the present petitioner and hence the same are hereby denied and not
admitted.
In view of the above, I am
of the opinion that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant
manager with the respondent purely on contract basis. So as soon as
contract is over, it is the prerogative of the management to
terminate the service. I do not find any merits in the matter and
therefore, the same is dismissed. Notice is discharged with no
order as to costs.
[K.S.Jhaveri,J.]
*Himansu
Top