Gujarat High Court
Chetan Jayantilal Rajgor vs State Of Gujarat on 13 June, 2018
Author: P.P.Bhatt
Bench: P.P.Bhatt
C/SCA/4439/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4439 of 2017
======================================================
CHETAN JAYANTILAL RAJGOR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
======================================================
Appearance:
MR SHALIN MEHTA, SR ADVOCATE with MR GAURAV K
MEHTA(5227) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
MR VR JANI, AGP(1) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1,2,3
RULE SERVED(64) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 4
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.P.BHATT
Date : 13/06/2018
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned senior advocate Mr. Shalin Mehta, assisted by Mr. Gaurav Mehta, the learned advocate for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner's services came to be terminated without following due procedure of law as envisaged in Government Resolution (GR) issued by the Finance Department dated 28.03.2016 whereby, the previous GR of General Administration Department (GAD) dated 04.06.2009 is ordered to be cancelled with a specific observation that instead of previous GR dated 04.06.2009, the terms and conditions of services according to the Statement (I) attached to the GR dated 28.03.2016 shall be governed. By referring Clause (14) of Statement (I) attached to GR dated 28.03.2016, it is pointed out that in the alleged case of misconduct, the departmental inquiry is required to be conducted by following the principles of natural justice, which, in the instant case, is not done. While referring para 6 and 7 of the affidavit-in-reply Page 1 of 2 C/SCA/4439/2017 ORDER filed by the respondent - State, it is pointed out that the State authorities have taken stand in the said reply that the appointment of the present petitioner was made on the basis of the Resolution of the Finance Department dated 16.02.2006 and therefore, the departmental inquiry is not required to be conducted in such cases. As against the said reply, it is pointed out by Mr. Mehta, the learned senior advocate for the petitioner, that the terms of appointment is governed as per the Appointment Order dated 17.05.2013 wherein, Clause (9) specifically mentions that the service conditions will be governed in light of the GR of GAD dated 04.06.2009 and now, the said GR is repealed by GR dated 28.03.2016.
2. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Jani for the respondent -
State prays for an adjournment to take instructions in the matter and file further affidavit, if required. The request is granted. List again on 27th June 2018.
[ P. P. Bhatt, J. ] hiren Page 2 of 2