Gujarat High Court High Court

=========================================Appearance vs Mr Pranav Dave on 21 January, 2010

Gujarat High Court
=========================================Appearance vs Mr Pranav Dave on 21 January, 2010
Author: Bhagwati Prasad,&Nbsp;Honourable Bankim.N.Mehta,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

LPA/2290/2009	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 2290 of 2009
 

In


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1319 of 2009
 

With


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 12416 of 2009
 

In


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 2290 of 2009
 

=========================================
 

JITENDRABHAI
NATAVARBHAI DESAI 

 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS 

 

=========================================Appearance
: 
MR VIJAY H
NANGESH for
the Appellant  
MR PRANAV DAVE, ASSTT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
Respondent(s) : 1, 
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
4. 
=========================================
 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 21/01/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD)

Heard
the learned counsel for the appellant.

Though
the Selection Committee enlisted the appellant, the District
Education Officer while approving the appointment, came to the
conclusion that the appellant does not possess the requisite
experience.

The
learned counsel for the appellant has produced before us the
advertisement which requires experience of last years. The experience
certificate of the appellant is purportedly for three years upto
2003 only and not thereafter (it may not be three years in full) and
therefore, the appointment was not offered to the appellant. In
this background, the learned Single Judge has not favoured the
appellant with any favourable order because the appellant was not
qualified.

According
to the qualifications laid down in the advertisement, the
requirement was that the appellant should have experience in the
last years, whereas the experience certificate of the appellant was
only upto 2003. He has not produced any certificate for last years.
It may be noticed that the selection was for 2006. In that view of
the matter, the learned Single Judge has not favoured the appellant
with any order and in our considered opinion, rightly so.

In
view of the above, the appeal has no force and the same is dismissed.

In
view of the dismissal of the main appeal, no orders are passed on the
Civil Application and the same is disposed of.

(BHAGWATI
PRASAD, J.)

(BANKIM
N.MEHTA, J.)

omkar

   

Top