Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
LPA/2889/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 2889 of 2010
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14280 of 2010
With
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 15132 of 2010
In
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 2889 of 2010
=========================================================
PURVAL
RAMANLAL PATEL SEAT NO.24045 & 1 - Appellant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
SP MAJMUDAR for
Appellant(s) : 1 - 2.
MR NJ SHAH, ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA
Date
: 09/12/2010
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA)
The
appellants are aggrieved by the order dated 29.10.2010 of this Court
in Special Civil Application No.14280 of 2010, whereby the petition
was partly allowed, but the main ground of challenge was turned
down. It was argued by learned counsel, Mr.S.P.Majmudar, appearing
for the appellants that the petitioners had applied for the post of
Sub-Inspector (Unarmed), Class III, in which the recruitment process
was initiated by advertisement dated 14.2.2009. According to that
advertisement, the selection was to be by competitive examination
held in two stages, wherein the first stage consisted of physical
test and preliminary examination. It was stipulated in the
advertisement that the candidate would be required to score minimum
50 marks out of total 100 marks in the physical test. Thereafter,
the stipulation in that regard was amended by subsequent
advertisement dated 31.5.2009 before which the Gujarat Police
Subordinate (Unarmed), Class III, Competitive Examination Rules,
2009 had been notified on 18.5.2009 and put in place in exercise of
powers conferred by Clause (b) Section 5 of the Bombay Police Act,
1951. Subsequent amendment of the advertisement by the corrigendum
dated 31.5.2009, was in confirmity with the aforesaid rules and it
was clarified in the corrigendum that the threshold for clearing the
physical test and preliminary examination would be fixed by the
Recruitment Board.
In
view of the above development, there was no room for the argument
that the rules and criteria to be followed in the recruitment
process were changed or altered during the course of selection
process or after the advertisement for recruitment. Even otherwise,
that contention does not appear to have been raised before learned
single Judge, as it appears from the impugned order that the only
contention of the appellants was that subsequent advertisement had
created confusion in the mind of the appellants. Thus, the
appellants appear to be agitating a new issue at the appellate stage
and that too is found to have no substance. Therefore, the appeal as
well as the civil application is dismissed in limine.
(D.H.WAGHELA,
J.)
(J.C.UPADHYAYA,
J.)
(binoy)
Top