Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Patel Padmaben Jayantibhai vs Director Of Primary Education & 7 on 28 October, 2015

Author: Abhilasha Kumari

Bench: Abhilasha Kumari

                  C/SCA/10021/2008                                             ORDER




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                     SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10021 of 2008
         ================================================================
                     PATEL PADMABEN JAYANTIBHAI....Petitioner(s)
                                     Versus
                DIRECTOR OF PRIMARY EDUCATION & 7....Respondent(s)
         ================================================================
         Appearance:
         MR MAULIN RAVAL FOR MS SHIVYA A DESAI,ADVOCATE for Petitioner No. 1
         MS SHRUTI PATHAK,ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent No. 1 - 2 , 8
         MR DA SANKHESARA, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 5 - 7
         MR DHAVAL D VYAS, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 5 - 7
         MR RAJESH CHAUHAN FOR MR HS MUNSHAW,ADVOCATE for Respondent No.3
         RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1 - 4 , 6 , 8
         ================================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA
                        KUMARI

                                     Date : 28/10/2015
                                      ORAL ORDER

When   the   matter   is   taken   up   for   hearing   today,  Mr.Maulin   Raval,  learned   advocate  for   Ms.Shivya   A.  Desai,  learned   advocate  for   the  petitioner,   has  submitted   that  respondents   Nos.5   to   7   have   been  appointed   as   Vidhya   Sahayaks   by   giving   them   5%  preferential marks on the basis of certificates issued  by one Mr.Sanjay Vakil, Secretary of the Gujarat State  Wrestling Association. The State Government has come  out   with   a   Government   Resolution   dated   17.07.2008,  wherein   it   is   stated  that   the  certificates   given   by  Page 1 of 6 HC-NIC Page 1 of 6 Created On Thu Oct 29 01:51:58 IST 2015 C/SCA/10021/2008 ORDER Mr.Sanjay Vakil are to be treated as cancelled. This  Government   Resolution   was   the   subject­matter   of  challenge before this Court in Patel Tulsiben Ambalal  and others Vs. State of Gujarat and others,  reported  in  2008   (3)   GLR   2685.   This   Court   has   categorically  stated in the said judgment that the preferential 5%  marks   awarded   to   candidates   on   the   basis   of  certificates   issued   irregularly   by   the   State  Association   cannot   be   given.   This   judgment   was   the  subject­matter   of   a   Letters   Patent   Appeal   in  Patel  Hardikkumar   Jagdishbhai   and   others   Vs.   State   of  Gujarat   and   others,  reported   in  2009   (4)   GLR   3183.  The Division Bench has upheld the order of this Court  and   dismissed   the   Letters   Patent   Appeal.   Hence,   the  Government Resolution dated 17.07.2008 still prevails.

It is further submitted that in the advertisement  dated   10.07.2004   it   is   required   that   the   original  certificates   relating   to   sports   produced   by   the  candidates   ought   to   be   certified   by   the   concerned  Sports Authority. However, respondents Nos.5 to 7 have  not   submitted   the   original   certificates   at   the  relevant point of time along with their applications  Page 2 of 6 HC-NIC Page 2 of 6 Created On Thu Oct 29 01:51:58 IST 2015 C/SCA/10021/2008 ORDER and the certificates submitted by them were submitted  later on, which is against the terms and conditions of  the advertisement.

That   the   petitioner   was   at   Serial   No.13   of   the  merit­list.   After   more   than   three   weeks,   the   merit­ list was changed by including respondents Nos.5 to 7  and   placing   them   higher   than   the   petitioner   in   the  merit­list   on   the   basis   of   5%   preferential   marks  awarded   to   them   on   the   basis   of   the   Sports  Certificates. 

That   the   Sports   Certificates   submitted   by  respondents Nos.5 to 7 have been issued by the same  Mr.Sanjay Vakil, whose certificates have been directed  to   be   cancelled   by   the   Government   Resolution   dated  17.07.2008.

That,   in   the   affidavit­in­reply,   affirmed   on  11.10.2015 filed on behalf of respondent No.3, it has  been stated that one post of Vidhya Sahayak has been  kept   vacant  pursuant  to  the   interim  order  passed   by  this Court in Special Civil Application No.911/2007,  filed by the petitioner. It is submitted that another  Page 3 of 6 HC-NIC Page 3 of 6 Created On Thu Oct 29 01:51:58 IST 2015 C/SCA/10021/2008 ORDER post   has   now   fallen   vacant   upon   the   resignation   of  respondent   No.6,   therefore,   the   petitioner   can   be  granted an opportunity to be considered for the said  post.

Mr.H.S.Munshaw,   learned   advocate   for   respondent  No.3, who is the main contesting respondent, has not  remained   present   today.   Mr.Rajesh   Chauhan,   learned  advocate   for   Mr.H.S.Munshaw,   learned   advocate   for  respondent   No.3,   submits   that   Mr.Munshaw   is   on   his  legs before another Court. 

The   arguments   of   the   learned   advocate   for   the  petitioner   are   being   recorded   so   as   to   enable  Mr.Munshaw to formulate his submissions as and when he  appears   before  the   Court.   It   would   also   be   required  for Mr.Munshaw to produce the original record of the  appointment of respondents Nos.5 to 7, in view of the  submissions   made   by   the   learned   advocate   for   the  petitioner.

It   may   also   be   clarified   on   which   date  respondents Nos.5 to 7 have produced the certificates  pursuant   to   the   advertisement.   The   learned   advocate  Page 4 of 6 HC-NIC Page 4 of 6 Created On Thu Oct 29 01:51:58 IST 2015 C/SCA/10021/2008 ORDER for   respondent   No.3   is   also   required   to   show   what  procedure   was   followed   by   the   said   respondent   while  granting appointments to respondents Nos.5 to 7.

Mr.H.S.Munshaw,   learned   advocate   for   respondent  No.3   shall   also   take   instructions   regarding   the  Government Resolution dated 17.07.2008, especially in  view of the judgments of this Court in Patel Tulsiben  Ambalal   and   others   Vs.   State   of   Gujarat   and   others  (supra) and  Patel Hardikkumar Jagdishbhai and others  Vs. State of Gujarat and others (supra). 

Respondents   Nos.1   and   2   shall   also   file   an  affidavit   stating   their   stand   with   regard   to   the  Government Resolution dated 17.07.2008, as affirmed by  the judgments of this Court in Patel Tulsiben Ambalal  and   others   Vs.   State   of   Gujarat   and   others   (supra)  and    Patel   Hardikkumar   Jagdishbhai   and   others   Vs.  State   of   Gujarat   and   others   (supra).  They   may   also  express an opinion regarding the certificates annexed  from   pages­66   to   71,   in   light   of   the   judgments  in  Tulsiben Ambalal and others Vs. State of Gujarat and  others (supra) and  Patel Hardikkumar Jagdishbhai and  Page 5 of 6 HC-NIC Page 5 of 6 Created On Thu Oct 29 01:51:58 IST 2015 C/SCA/10021/2008 ORDER others Vs. State of Gujarat and others (supra).

Mr.Rajesh   Chauhan,  learned   advocate  for  Mr.H.S.Munshaw,  learned advocate  for  respondent  No.3,  may apprise Mr.Munshaw of the order of this Court.

List on 02.12.2015.

(SMT. ABHILASHA KUMARI, J.) Gaurav+ Page 6 of 6 HC-NIC Page 6 of 6 Created On Thu Oct 29 01:51:58 IST 2015