Gujarat High Court
Adalja Paurav Bakulkumar & vs State Of Gujarat & 2 on 7 July, 2016
Author: N.V.Anjaria
Bench: N.V.Anjaria
C/SCA/10652/2014 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10652 of 2014
===========================================================
ADALJA PAURAV BAKULKUMAR & 11....Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 2....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MS MAMTA R VYAS, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 - 12
MR BHARGAV PANDYA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 , 3
MR DG SHUKLA, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
Date : 07/07/2016
ORAL ORDER
Heard learned advocate Ms. Mamta Vyas for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Bhargav Pandya for respondent Nos.1 and 3-state authorities and learned advocate Mr. D. G. Shukla for respondent No.2-Gujarat Public Service Commission.
2. The petitioners-in all 12 in numbers have approached this Court by filing the present petition seeking relief against proposed termination of their services sought to be effected by way of impugned order dated 25.07.2014.
3. All the petitioners were appointed on 09.11.2009 as Lecturers in the subject of Mathematics in Government Engineering Colleges on fixed salary of Rs.20,000/-. Their appointment was initially for a period of 11 months with deficient that the same shall continue till regularly selected candidates are made available for the post in question. It is Page 1 of 6 HC-NIC Page 1 of 6 Created On Tue Jul 12 01:26:20 IST 2016 C/SCA/10652/2014 ORDER uncontrovertedly stated that the services of the petitioners were thereafter continued beyond the period of 11 months. It is also uncontrovertedly stated that the second respondent-Commission issued advertisement undertaking selection process to fill up the posts in the year 2011 as well as in the year 2013. In the said process, certain candidates were selected and appointed as Lecturers. Still however, the posts of Lectures in the subject of Mathematics remained to be filled up. The petitioners have given the details of number of applicants/selectees and the posts remained after the posting done of candidates which are not necessary to be gone into.
3.1 While issuing notice, this Court passed order dated 31.07.2014 which is extracted with relevance, "2.........learned advocate for the petitioners has invited the attention to the chart below paragraph 6 of the memorandum of petition to point out that as against the sanctioned posts, even after including the adhoc appointees and the posts filled up by GPSC selected candidates, there are still vacant posts available. Under the circumstances, there is no justification for terminating the services of the petitioners. The attention of the court is invited to the judgment and order dated 7th September, 2011 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.2986/2010 wherein the court initially had, by an interim order, directed the respondents to permit the adhoc employees to continue till regularly selected candidates are available making it clear that adhoc Lecturers would have no right to continue against any particular post and they will have to make a room as and when the posts will be filled up on regular basis. The court while disposing off the appeal further directed that till regular appointments are made, the respondents shall continue the interim arrangement as ordered by the court by its Page 2 of 6 HC-NIC Page 2 of 6 Created On Tue Jul 12 01:26:20 IST 2016 C/SCA/10652/2014 ORDER interim order dated 24th March, 2011. It was submitted that similar relief may be granted to the petitioners.
3. This court has also heard Mr. D.M. Devnani, learned Assistant Government Pleader who has pointed out that under the new recruitment rules viz. Assistant Professor, Class-II in Humanities and Sciences (in different disciplines) Recruitment Rules, 2011, the qualification for the post of Assistant Professor, Class-II is Ph.D. in Humanities or Sciences. However, the learned Assistant Government Pleader is not in a position to dispute the position that there are several vacancies even after the posts are filled in by the regularly selected candidates."
3.2 Having noted the controversy as above, following ad-interim relief was granted by the Court, "4......By way of ad-interim relief, the impugned order dated 25 th July, 2014 is hereby stayed and the respondents are restrained from terminating the services of the petitioners and are further directed to continue them on their respective posts without altering their service conditions, subject to availability of regularly selected GPSC candidates."
4. Learned APG filed affidavit-in-reply affirmed by one Shyam Varghese, Deputy Director of Technical Education, Gandhinagar in which it is admitted that the services of the petitioners have been continued. It is further stated that there is no impediment in continuing their services as per the stipulation in the order. It is further stated that when regularly selected candidates would be available, the said posts would be filled up with such regularly selected candidates.
5. It is not in dispute that as far as present Page 3 of 6 HC-NIC Page 3 of 6 Created On Tue Jul 12 01:26:20 IST 2016 C/SCA/10652/2014 ORDER petitioners are concerned, they have been continued on the posts of Lecturers in the subject of Mathematics in the different Government Colleges where they are posted, and qua them, no regularly selected candidates as Lecturers in the subject of Mathematics are available. In the recruitment process undertaken in the year 2011 and 2013, the posts remained to be filled up by regularly selected candidates either because of unavailability of candidates or availability of excess posts. No occasion therefore arose to disturb the petitioners.
5.1 The termination was sought to be effected by the impugned order, even as regularly selected candidates to be posted against the petitioners herein are not available. It is in this context that this Court granted the aforesaid interim relief.
5.2 The present ad-hoc employees have been working continuously. Regular selected candidates who could be posted, are not available. It is trite principle that ad-hoc employee should not be replaced by another ad- hoc employee without valid reason. This proposition of law is well settled in view of decision of Division Bench of this Court in Hiren N. Upadhaya & 12 vs. Bhavik M. Patel being Letters Patent Appeal No. 2986 of 2010 decided on 07.09.2011.
5.3 The principles were stated by the Division Bench in terms of the final directions as under, "In view of the aforesaid position and taking into consideration the interest of the students Page 4 of 6 HC-NIC Page 4 of 6 Created On Tue Jul 12 01:26:20 IST 2016 C/SCA/10652/2014 ORDER and the fact that the adhoc Lecturers are continuing since 10 to 20 years, the following interim order is passed for the present:-
(i) The order dated 8th October 2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Application No.10773/2009 in Special Civil Application No.5797/2009 is stayed.
(ii) The respondents are directed to fill up all posts which are already advertised, by regular appointment. We have noticed that a large number of appointments have already been made but further appointments are required to be made out of the recommendation as will be made by GPSC.
(iii) On such appointment of regular Lecturers, if so required, the adhoc Lecturers may have to be shifted from particular Degree/Diploma Engineering College to accommodate the regular appointees. In such case, the authorities will accommodate adhoc Lecturers against some other posts for which no such advertisement has been issued, may be in some other equivalent Degree/Diploma Engineering College in any district.
(iv) Till the posts are filled up by regular appointment, the adhoc Lecturers be not disturbed.
(v) Those adhoc Lecturers whose services have been terminated in view of the order passed by the learned Single Judge, if there is no allegation or departmental proceedings pending against them, they be accommodated on adhoc basis in one or other equivalent standard Degree/Diploma Engineering College in any of the district of the State, against the posts which are not yet been advertised. If there is no post to accommodate, in that case, their services may be terminated."
5.4 Decision of this Court in Pradeep Navinbhai Patel & 61 vs. State of Gujarat & 2 being Special Civil Application No.13200 of 2013 and group of petitions follows the footsteps of the aforesaid Page 5 of 6 HC-NIC Page 5 of 6 Created On Tue Jul 12 01:26:20 IST 2016 C/SCA/10652/2014 ORDER decision of the Division Bench and reiterate the proposition.
6. In view of aforesaid fact-situation emerging, interests of justice would be served if the petition is disposed of in terms of interim relief granted by this Court.
7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 25.07.2014 is hereby quashed and set aside. It is directed that the respondents are restrained from terminating the services of the petitioners and further directed to allow them to continue on their respective posts without altering their service conditions till and until the regularly selected candidates are available and would be posted by the respondent-Commission qua the petitioners.
The petition stands allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
(N.V.ANJARIA, J.) chandrashekhar Page 6 of 6 HC-NIC Page 6 of 6 Created On Tue Jul 12 01:26:20 IST 2016