Gujarat High Court High Court

Chaudhari vs State on 13 December, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Chaudhari vs State on 13 December, 2010
Author: Ks Jhaveri,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/699120/2008	 1/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6991 of 2008
 

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

 

CHAUDHARI
GEETABEN GALBABHAI - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
BN PATEL for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR HH PARIKH, AGP,  for Respondent(s) : 1 -
2. 
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2. 
MR HS MUNSHAW for
Respondent(s) :
3, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 24/10/2008 

 

ORAL
ORDER

1. The
petitioner for a direction to respondent no.3 to give appointment to
the petitioner as Vidyasahayak in the District from the waiting list
prepared for Vidyasahayak Recruitment 2007 for SEBC (Baxi Panch)
category for PTC candidates.

2. The
petitioner had applied for the post of Vidyasahayak in the category
of SEBC known as Baxi Panch as PTC qualified candidate. After the
process the petitioner stood at serial no.460 in the merit list for
SEBC PTC candidates. Since at the relevant time the vacancies were
454 the petitioner was placed in waiting list of SEBC PTC candidates.

3. According
tot he petitioner there is a resolution dated 18.9.2007 of Education
Department of respondent no.1 State Government formulating a policy
to give appointment to the candidates of waiting list of Recruitment
of Vidyasahayak 2007 if the posts have fallen vacant due to
resignation from that recruitment. The respondent no.3 has given
appointment orders to the candidates of waiting list category-wise by
holding a camp for choice of posting on 28.1.2008. The appointment in
the category of SEBC PTC candidates from waiting list was given upto
the merit serial No.459 i.e. Till the candidate immediately preceding
the petitioner. The petitioner is not given appointment though there
were vacancies arising from recruitment of 2007 itself due to
resignation after January 2008. Though the petitioner has made
representation to consider her case the respondent authority has
proceeded to issue fresh advertisement. Hence the petitioner has
filed the present petition.

4. Learned
Advocate for the petitioner submitted that one Shri Mehul M Patel,
appointed on 24.3.2007 has submitted resignation on 12.3.2008. His
resignation was with immediate effect by paying the requisite notice
pay which is paid on 13.3.2008. Therefore there was a vacancy which
had fallen prior to 14.3.2008 in the category of petitioner itself
i.e. Baxi Panch. According to the petitioner the petitioner should
have been appointed soon thereafter as the right of the petitioner to
be appointed as Vidyasahayak from the waiting list had already
accrued prior to 14.3.2008.

5. Mr.

Munshaw submitted that the resignation was at a later stage.

6. As
a result of hearing and perusal of the record certain aspects are not
disputed. One Mr. Mehul Patel and Miss Panchal have resigned prior to
14th March 2008 after fulfilling the compliance of the
statutory requirement and the resignations were accepted by the
District Primary Education Officer after a delay. However, the
respondent cannot be allowed to take advantage of their own delay.
Even if it is accepted that the acceptance of resignation was
subsequent, it is well settled principle that the resignation will
relate back to the date on which it was tendered. The Therefore
there was clear vacancy at the relevant time on which the petitioner
should have been considered for appointment. It is also required to
be noted that the President of District Education Committee of
Panchayat has also recommended for appointment of the petitioner.

7. In
the premises aforesaid the respondent is directed to consider the
case of the petitioner for appoint as Vidyasahayak from the waiting
list prepared for Vidyasahayak Recruitment 2007. In case less
meritorious candidates are already appointed, consequential seniority
will be given tot he petitioner. The petition is allowed to the
aforesaid extent. Direct service permitted.

[K.S.

JHAERI, J.]

ar

   

Top