JUDGMENT :

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Soaham Joshi, learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent State.

2. By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed to direct the respondents authority to operate the waiting list against the post which has been vacant due to resignation of selected candidates and thereby further direct them to consider the case of the petitioners by giving relaxation in time. The petitioners have further prayed for holding that provision of 'one year in case of resignation' in the resolutions dated 10.08.2016 and 27.07.2018 is contrary to the purpose and intention behind the said resolution itself.

3. Facts in brief would indicate that on 17.10.2017, an advertisement no. 144/2017-18 came to be published for 35 posts of Jamadar, Class-III. The petitioners submitted their applications on the website. On 20.05.2018, preliminary examinations were conducted. On 25.10.2018, physical test was conducted. Written examinations were held on 12.07.2019 and document verification was done on 27.07.2019.

3.1 The Gujarat Subordinate Services Selection Board published the results on 31.08.2019. 13 candidates were in the waiting list. According to the Government Resolution dated 10.08.2016 and 27.07.2018, the select list was so published on 31.08.2019. The petitioner no. 1 was at Sr. No. 2, the petitioner no. 2 was at Sr. No. 6 and the petitioner no. 3 was at Sr. No. 11 in the waiting list. On 19.09.2019, the recommendation was sent to the State for appointment. The candidates who were selected were appointed in February 2020. In March 2021 since four candidates did not report, the waiting list was operated.

3.2 It is the case of the petitioners that by the same advertisement, higher posts of P.I were advertised and five candidates from the select list at Sr Nos. 2, 3, 13, 17 and 28 were selected for the higher post of P.I for which results were declared in March 2021. These five candidates resigned on 21.08.2021 on they being selected for appointment to the higher post.

4. Mr. Gautam Joshi, learned Senior Advocate appearing with Mr. S.M. Kikani, learned advocate for the petitioners would submit that since the Government Resolutions dated 10.08.2016 and 27.07.2018 provide that the life of the waiting list would be two years, the arising of vacancies as a result of resignation of five candidates before the tenure of the waiting list which ended on 31.08.2021, the petitioners ought to have been appointed on the basis of operation of the waiting list. However, since the petitioners were not so appointed they made representations to the authorities requesting them to appoint the petitioners, especially in light of the pandemic in the interregnum, which ought to also extend the life of the list. No such appointments were given by operating the waiting list.

4.1 Reiterating the submissions, Mr. Gautam Joshi, learned Senior Advocate would submit that the stand of the respondents is that they are not operating the waiting list on the ground that since the five candidates had resigned after a period of one year from their date of joining, the waiting list cannot be operated inasmuch as there is a clear stipulation in the resolutions that on arising of vacancies, the waiting list shall operate for a period of two years or before the next recruitment whichever is earlier. He would submit that admittedly the present vacancies had occurred within two years and since there was no new advertisement, a right accrued to the petitioners to seek appointment on the basis of their placement in the waiting list.

5. Mr. Soaham Joshi, learned AGP would submit that for the posts which were advertised in the year 2017, the list was prepared on 31.08.2019. The five candidates had resigned on 21.08.2021 and in accordance with the Government Resolution dated 27.10.2018, though the time of operating the waiting list is two years, there is a clear stipulation in the resolu