Gujarat High Court High Court

Rathod vs State on 25 November, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Rathod vs State on 25 November, 2010
Author: Abhilasha Kumari,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/14957/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14957 of 2010
 

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

 

RATHOD
DIPAKSINH DHIRAJSINH - ASSISTANT TEACHER - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 3 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
KB PUJARA for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR ANAND L SHARMA, ASSTT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
for Respondent(s) : 1, 
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
4. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HON'BLE
			SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
		
	

 

Date
: 25/11/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

The
learned advocate for the petitioner has moved a Draft Amendment
today. The same is permitted and directed to be carried out
forthwith.

Heard
Mr.K.B.Pujara, learned advocate for the petitioner. It is submitted
by him that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in
respondent No.4 – Ashram Shala on 01.03.2000 and his salary has
been paid till date. However, after a period of ten years, respondent
No.1 has declined to grant approval to the appointment of the
petitioner on the ground that the age of the petitioner is beyond the
upper age limit. The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that
Schedule-F of the Bombay Primary Education Rules, 1949, provides for
a lower age limit of 18 years but no upper age limit is provided.
Moreover, this rule has been brought to the notice of respondent No.1
by the Director of Primary Education by letter dated 14.09.2005,
annexed as Annexure-S to the petition and pursuant thereto, the
Commissioner, Tribal Development, has applied this rule in favour of
five persons by order dated 13.05.2008, annexed as Annexure-T to the
petition. The petitioner is, therefore, being discriminated against
and the respondent No.1 is applying another standard in the case of
the petitioner than that applied in the case of the persons named in
Annexure-T.

Notice
returnable on 08.12.2010.

The learned Assistant Government Pleader may take instructions
regarding the case of the petitioner qua Annexures-S and T dated
14.09.2005 and 13.05.2008 respectively.

In
addition to the normal mode of service, Direct Service is also
permitted.

(Smt.Abhilasha
Kumari, J.)

(sunil)

   

Top