The High Court of Gujarat dismissed a challenge to the rejection of regularization services for an Assistant Teacher. The court held the petitioner lacked requisite qualifications on the advertisement date, found no perversity below, and dismissed the petition due to inordinate delay and petitioner's conduct.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C/SCA/2843/2021 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2843 of 2021
==========================================================
CHAUDHARY ARVINDKUMAR LAVJIBHAI
Versus STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR GUNVANT R THAKAR(3801) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MS BHARGAVI G THAKAR(5015) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4,5,6
ADVANCE COPY SERVED TO GOVERNMENT PLEADER/PP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.G.URAIZEE
Date : 11/02/2021
ORAL ORDER
(b) to quash and set aside order no.UMSH-1108-1596-G.1 dated 11/10/2012 (Annexure-D) and order No.UMSH-11081596-G1 dated 31/07/2020 (Annexure-A Colly.) issued by the respondent no.1 – Education Department and order dated 30/11/2016 (Annexure-A Colly.) passed by the Ld.Gujarat Educational Services Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Appeal No.325/2014 (Old No.50/2013); and/or
(c) hold and declare that petitioner is entitled for regularization of services as an Assistant Teacher
Page 1 of 5
C/SCA/2843/2021 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2021
considering G.R.No.UMSH-1207-EM-15-G1 dated 08/03/2007 and G.R.No.UMSH-1207-EM-15-G.1 dated 19/06/2007 on the basis of the proposal made by respondent no.4 – District Education Officer, Patan vide letter no.K-1/SEC.20457 dated 21/09/2007 addressed to respondent no.6; and/or
(d) direct respondent authorities to regularize services of the petitioner w.e.f. academic year 2007 i.e. from June, 2007 and pay regular salary with all admissible allowances w.e.f. June, 2007 to the petitioner including benefit of higher pay scale as per the Govt.Scheme; and /or
(e) direct respondent authorities to pay arrears of regular pay and allowances to the petitioner as an Assistant Teacher w.e.f. June, 2007; and /or
(f) pending admission and final disposal of the petition, direct respondents authorities not to terminate the services of the petitioner as an Assistant Teacher from respondent no.3 – Jyoti Vidya Vihar, Adiya managed and run by respondent no.2 – Adiya kelavani Uttejak Mandal, Adiya Tal. Harij District – Patan; and / or.
Page 2 of 5
C/SCA/2843/2021 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2021
squarely covered by the resolution of the Government and his services should be regularized in respondent No.2 school which is grant-in-aid school. She accordingly submits that the petition requires consideration.
Page 3 of 5
C/SCA/2843/2021 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2021
petition cannot be entertained for examining the prayers made in the present petition. Even, if the present petition is considered to be one under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, then scope of supervisory jurisdiction is very limited. This Court can interfere with the order of the lower authorities while exercising supervisory jurisdiction only if the same is found to be perverse or beyond jurisdiction. A perusal of the order of the authority below does not reveal that it is perverse or without jurisdiction. Therefore also, the present petition does not warrant consideration.
Page 4 of 5
C/SCA/2843/2021 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2021
waiting for decision of the review application which respondent No.2 had made to the Commissioner of Education Department. Thus, conduct of the petitioner itself disentitles him to question decision of the authority after a gap of around more than four years.
(A.G.URAIZEE, J)
H.M. PATHAN
Page 5 of 5
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled for regularization of services as an Assistant Teacher despite lacking qualifying marks on the date of advertisement.
Whether the writ petition is maintainable and warrants consideration.
Whether the delay of over four years in approaching this court can be condoned.
Chaudhary Arvindkumar Lavjibhai
State of Gujarat
A. G. Urizee
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
