Gujarat High Court
Deepak vs State on 14 November, 2011
Author: Anant S. Dave
Bench: Anant S. Dave
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/5141/2011 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5141 of 2011
=========================================================
DEEPAK
JAGDISHCHANDRA THAKER - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - THROUGH SECRETARY & 3 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
PARESH UPADHYAY for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MS JIRGA JHAVERI, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
Respondent(s) : 1,
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 2 - 3.
NOTICE
SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 2 - 4.
NOTICE UNSERVED for
Respondent(s) :
4,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE
Date
: 06/09/2011
ORAL
ORDER
RULE.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Jirga Jhaveri waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent - State.
Heard learned Advocates for the parties.
On 23.08.1997, the petitioner was appointed as Senior Lecturer by the Department of Education on an adhoc basis and the above status of the petitioner continued till he was relieved from his duties by an order dated 24.01.2011.
It is also not in dispute that by an order dated 10.01.2011, the petitioner came to be appointed on a probation of two years for the post of a Lecturer on certain conditions as mentioned in the letter of Appointment.
The challenge in this petition is the order dated 14.02.2011 passed by the respondent authority of initiating recovery of the amount towards notice pay on the ground that the earlier service of the petitioner on an adhoc basis ought to have been counted as continuous service for all purposes and considering the fact that the petitioner was relieved from one post to join another post in the same Department, the authorities ought to have granted consequential benefit. The prayers have been made in this petition on the above lines in Paragraph 7 of the petition.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the respondent has relied on the affidavit-in-reply filed by the Deputy Director, Gujarat Council of Educational Research and Training (GCERT), Gandhinagar wherein it is submitted that the petitioner was not regularised as per the rules and regulations of the State Government. The petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of a regularly appointed employee. It is further submitted that even on verification when the petitioner was called for, it was specifically mentioned that the post was not a Government post but it was a service post of the Council (GCERT) and no benefits can be conferred on the petitioner as prayed for.
On perusal of the record and submissions of the learned Advocates for the parties, it is not in dispute that initially appointment of the petitioner from 23.08.1997 till he was relieved was an adhoc employment and no rule, regulation or a scheme is brought on record providing regularisation or continuity of service for such adhoc employment and in absence of such rules / scheme etc. framed by the State Government, no direction can be given to treat the service of adhoc employee as a continuous one. Hence, no relief can be granted as prayed for in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petition lacks merit and is rejected. Rule discharged. No order as to costs.
Sd/-
(Anant S. Dave, J.) Caroline Top