Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8. Mr.Shalin Mehta learned Senior Advocate appearing with Ms.Shikha Panchal learned advocate for the petitioners in these petitions would submit that at the relevant time the candidates who had undergone successful examination and training were given appointment. Some of the candidates who were successful in the years 1991 and 1992 were given appointment to the posts of X-ray technicians. However, the petitioners were left out. Pursuant to an advertisement of 21.11.2000 inviting applications for the post of Radiography Technician, the petitioners were appointed. The petitioner filed Special Civil Application No.12349 of 2000 and allied matters praying for a direction to declare that the non-grant of appointment as X-ray technicians in the pay scale of Rs.5000-8000/- to the petitioners is illegal and to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order and joining upon the respondents to give appointment to the petitioners as X-ray technicians. The Court considering the facts, disposed of the earlier petitions. On a Letters C/SCA/3921/2019 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/08/2022 Patent Appeal being filed, the order was modified to consider their case for regularization and by the impugned order dated 19.06.2018, it is the case of the State that the petitioners were given an opportunity to accept appointment by orders dated 30.12.2006 which they did not accept and their appointments not being regular but on an ad-hoc basis, their request for regularization has been rejected.

16. Mr.Sharma, learned AGP, would further submit that it is a well settled principle that merely because by interim orders the petitioners are continued in service in all these petitions, except in one in which there is an order of termination already dated 12.03.2019, their continuance would not create any equity in their favour.

True it is that the petitioners may claim that they possess the qualifications that are required for such appointments based on the recruitment rules which are placed on record separately by Mr.Sharma, learned AGP, admittedly their appointment is not through the Gujarat Subordinate C/SCA/3921/2019 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/08/2022 Services Selection Board, by virtue of an advertisement and ad-hoc services therefore their service cannot be claimed to be regularized. He would also rely on a further affidavit in reply filed by the Department of Medical Education & Research. He would submit that the State issued a Resolution dated 04.07.2011 with regard to the recruitment process which has to be followed by any department which wants to recruit any Class-III employees through direct recruitment. After the consultation of the Finance Department, the whole recruitment process is to be undertaken by the Gujarat Subordinate Service Selection Board. In case of the present petitioners, the State has forwarded a proposal to the Health & Family Welfare Department for the post of 1035 Para Medical Staff which includes 523 X-Ray Technicians. As far as X-ray Technician is concerned, an advertisement was issued on 18.06.2012 for the 23 posts that were sanctioned, the criteria laid down in the advertisement for the post of X-ray Technician was that they should be B.Sc. with Physics, English or Chemistry C/SCA/3921/2019 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/08/2022 and they should have one year experience in any other medical college. For these posts, the recruitment has to be undertaken by the Board. However, the State has taken a decision that since for the earlier recruitment pending in the year 2018, the present advertisement and the report cannot be considered and therefore, the recruitment is not to be undertaken.

3 The writ applicants before me are all serving as the X-Ray Technicians in the government hospitals.

4 The writ applicants have prayed for the following reliefs:

6(a) to allow this petition with costs and to declare that the non-grant of the appointment as X-Ray Technicians in the pay scale of Rs.5000 8000/- to the petitioners is illegal and to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order in the nature of writ, enjoining upon the respondents to give appointments to the petitioners as X-Ray Technicians in the pay scale of Rs. 5000 8000/-.

And

(d) to grant such further and other reliefs, as may be deemed to be just and proper.

5 The facts of this case are in a very narrow st compass. For the period between 1 October 1991 th st & 30 October 1993, and between 1 October th 1992 and 30 October 1993, all the petitioners underwent the training course as the X-Ray Technician, which was held in September 1993. It is the case of the petitioners that all those candidates, who passed the examination held in September 1993, were offered appointments vide order dated th 18 July 1998. However, the petitioners herein were left out. In the year 2000, an advertisement was published in a Gujarat Daily for the posts of the Radiography Technician. It is the case of the petitioners that the issue of such advertisement was a departure made from the normal and consistent practice. To put in other words, it appears that all the petitioners were working as the X-Ray Technicians in the government hospitals on contractual basis, after executing a bond. After the bond period was completed, they continued to serve as adhoc employees. They were expecting that having completed the bond period of service, the Government would appoint them on the vacant sanctioned posts of the X-Ray Technicians. However, this did not happen.