( 1 ) THIS group of petitions are filed in the matter of appointment on the post of Lecturers in government colleges invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 in special reference to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Scope of further division of these group matters is positively there on set of facts, but notionally it can be said that these petitions are moved by two rival groups viz one group is of candidates who are selected by Gujarat Public Service Commission ("gpsc" for short) for the post of Lecturer awaiting appointment. Another group is of those Lecturers who have been appointed as Lecturers on an adhoc basis till regularly selected candidates by GPSC are made available. Those petitioners who have been selected by GPSC for the post of Lecturers have prayed for a writ of mandamus for issuance of directions to the Government to appoint them on the post of Lecturers. The other group is of Lecturers already appointed on adhoc basis and are working as Lecturers in various government colleges in State of Gujarat. This second group viz. Lecturers appointed on ad hoc basis, can be further divided in sub-groups. Some of the Lecturers at present are serving as Lecturers in Govt. Colleges are party respondents in Spl. C. A. No. 2395/2001 filed by GPSC Selectees. Six such Lecturers had approached this Court by filing Civil Application NO. 6633/2001 for joining them as party respondents in the writ petition filed by GPSC selected candidates and as per the order passed in the Civil Application, all of them are joined as party-respondents and are brought on record as such. State of Gujarat has moved Civil Applications to vacate interim stay granted in favour of the ad-hoc Lecturers. All these petitions involving similar issues are heard simultaneously and ld. counsel appearing for the parties in all these petitions including the ld. Advocate General Mr. S. N. Shelat have jointly submitted and contended that all these petitions and other civil applications filed can be disposed of by a common judgment.

( 2 ) I have heard ld. counsel Mr. Upadhyay for the petitioner as well as heard the respondents who have expressed their desire to submit before this Court. Some of the ld. counsel appearing for the ad hoc appointees have adopted the arguments advanced by ld. Sr. Counsel Mr. Harubhai Mehta and Ld. Sr. Counsel Mr. Yatin Oza. Ld. Counsel Mr. Paresh Upadhyay and ld. Counsel Mr. Nilay Anjaria have submitted their arguments for the petitioners selected by GPSC for the post of Lecturers awaiting their appointments, but mostly they have adopted the arguments advanced by ld. Advocate General Mr. S. N. Shelat appearing for the State and Ld. Counsel Mr. D. N. Patel appearing for GPSC.

( 3 ) THE facts pleaded, if referred in brief, would be proper. However, with a view to get the main dispute crystallized and agitated before this Court, the case pleaded by GPSC selected candidates, if stated in brief, would be convenient. The case of the petitioner of Spl. C. A. No. 2395/2001 is that the GPSC, on the strength of the requisition made by the State Government, issued public advertisement for recruitment on the post of Lecturer in government colleges in different subjects. The advertisement was issued for 475 vacancies on 15. 6. 1998. The petitioner had applied in response to the said advertisement and it is contended that after due process of selection, the petitioner was declared selected by GPSC. That on 21. 1. 2000, name of the petitioner was recommended by GPSC to the Government for appointment on the post of Lecturer in the subject of History. On 20. 8. 2000, the Government called the petitioner for verification of certificates and testimonials etc. and according to the petitioner, he has also undergone that formality. Appointments on the post of Lecturer in government colleges are governed by the Statutory Rules framed by the Government. All these posts are within the purview of the GPSC and, theref