Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/13020/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 13020 of 2010
=================================================
D
S CHAUDHURI - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
=================================================
Appearance
:
MRAMITNCHAUDHARY
for Petitioner(s) : 1,
Ms.MANISHA NARSINGHANI, ASST GOVERNMENT
PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3.
=================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
Date
: 06/10/2010
ORAL
ORDER
The petitioner
is before this Court challenging the seniority list published by
Gujarat Council of Education & Research Training (GCERT),
Gandhinagar. The learned advocate for the petitioner could not point
out that he has mentioned anything about hearing which was granted by
GCERT on 3rd September 2010 to the persons like the
petitioner, who had raised objections about the provisional seniority
list dated 1st April 2010.
The petitioner,
after the seniority list was published on 7th September
2010, had filed representation on 14th September 2010, a
copy of that is produced at page 39. This representation was replied
by the Secretary, GCERT, Gandhinagar by letter dated 15th
September 2010, wherein it is specifically mentioned that the
seniority list is prepared after taking into consideration the
representation made by the persons like the petitioner, against the
provisional seniority list dated 1st April 2010, for which
personal hearing was granted on 3rd September 2010 before
a Committee and it is only as per the decision taken by that
Committee that the present seniority list is published.
2. The
petitioner ought to have stated in the petition that, ‘earlier there
was a provisional seniority list published on 1st April
2010. Objections were invited against the said seniority list.
Thereafter, personal hearing was given on 3rd September
2010 by a Committee, before whom the petitioner or similarly
situated persons had pointed out their objections, but then the same
are not considered by that Committee. It is thereafter that as per
the decision of that Committee, final seniority list is prepared’.
In the present petition, not a word is mentioned about hearing given
on 3rd September 2010, besides no mention is made about
the contents of the representation made by the petitioner or person
similarly situated before that Committee, hence the petition cannot
be entertained. The same is dismissed on the ground of suppression
of material fact.
3. At this
juncture, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that there
are other petitions filed by other persons against this very
seniority list being Special Civil Applications No.5173 of 2010 and
5174 of 2010, which are admitted. This submission does not help the
petitioner because there is nothing on record to show that there was
suppression like the present petition, in those petitions also and
still they are admitted. In light of the aforesaid discussion, this
petition is dismissed.
(RAVI
R. TRIPATHI, J.)
karim
Top