Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
LPA/1962/2010 1/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 1962 of 2010
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 16795 of 2004
=========================================================
B.H.KOTWAL
- Appellant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
DHARMESH V SHAH for
Appellant(s) : 1,
Ms. M.L. SHAH, ld. AGP, for respondent No. 1
None
for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA
Date
: 07/09/2010
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE)
This
appeal arises out of judgement and order passed in Special Civil
Application No. 16795 of 2004 on 11.5.2010 whereby the petition came
to be dismissed by learned Single Judge of this Court.
The
petitioner had approached this Court with the said petition praying
for regularization of services in the light of Government Resolutions
dated 9.11.1981 and 15.12.1984. Learned Single Judge relying on the
decision of the Apex Court in the case of PINAKI CHATTERJEE &
ORS. VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. reported in (2009) 5 SCC 193
dismissed the petition. Hence this appeal.
Learned
advocate Mr. Shah for the appellant submits that the said decision
would not apply to the facts of the present case. He relies on the
decision of the Apex Court in the case of SECRETARY, STATE OF
KARNATAKA & ORS. VS. UMADEVI & ORS. reported in (2006) 4 SCC
1 particularly paragraph No. 53 and submits that appellant has been
in service not under any protection granted by the Court and
therefore the benefit ought to have been given.
In
our view, Government Resolution dated 9.11.1981 which is heavily
relied on by learned advocate for the appellant, in fact, deals with
a question of appointing Assistant Lecturers as Lecturers. The two
posts are of different cadres and it is not dealing with the question
of regularization. The submission of learned advocate for the
appellant that on the basis of that Government Resolution the
appointment of the appellant may be regularized cannot be accepted.
The
conclusion arrived at by learned Single Judge, therefore, does not
call for any interference. The appeal must fail and stands dismissed.
(A.L.
DAVE, J)
(BANKIM
N. MEHTA, J)
(pkn)
Top