2022 Supreme(Guj) 1116
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.Y. Kogje, J.
Nayi Rasiklal Ganpatlal & 25 Others – Petitioners
Versus
State Of Gujarat & 9 Others – Respondents
R/Special Civil Application No. 9511 of 2004
Decided On : 06-10-2022
For the Petitioners: Mr. Saurabh J. Mehta.
For the Respondents: Mr. Rohan Shah, A.G.P., Mr. J.J. Yajnik, Mr. Kandarp D. Acharya.
The court emphasized that the appointment of the private respondents was in accordance with their Recruitment Rules and justified, and the petitioners' appointment as Nursing Tutor was by direct recruitment, precluding their claim for deemed date of promotion.
Headnote:
Promotion - Nursing Tutor - Indian Nursing Council, State Nursing Council - Rule 3(b)(i) - B.Sc. Degree in nursing, Diploma in Nursing Education - PHN Course - Discrimination - Deemed Date of Promotion
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought deemed date of promotion to the post of Nursing Tutor, alleging that less qualified individuals were promoted ahead of them. They claimed discrimination and non-compliance with Indian Nursing Council and State Nursing Council rules.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appointment of the private respondents was in accordance with their Recruitment Rules and justified. The petitioners' appointment as Nursing Tutor was by direct recruitment, and they could not claim deemed date compared to the private respondents. The court dismissed the petition, stating that the petitioners failed to make out a case for deemed date of promotion.
Issues: Discrimination in promotion, compliance with Nursing Council rules, deemed date of promotion
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appointment of the private respondents was in accordance with their Recruitment Rules and justified. The petitioners' appointment as Nursing Tutor was by direct recruitment, and they could not claim deemed date compared to the private respondents.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, and the rule was discharged. Ad interim relief granted earlier stands vacated.
JUDGMENT :
1. This petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed seeking direction to the respondents to give deemed date of promotion to the petitioners to the post of Nursing Tutor primarily on the ground that less qualified and ineligible respondents have been given promotion to the post of Nursing Tutor.
2. Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are having the requisite educational qualification as prescribed under the Nursing Tutor Recruitment Rules as per the Indian Nursing Council. Ignoring such Rules, the respondents have promoted employees having lesser educational qualification to the post of Nursing Tutor. Such employees where having P.H.N. degree, which according to the petitioners, is not the required qualification.
2.1 It is submitted that the PHN Course is run at Baroda since 1982 and in the year 1994, Government of Gujarat approved the said course. It is submitted that the institution which is running the PHN Course is not recognized and approved by the State Nursing Council or Indian Nursing Council. It is submitted that as per the Rules, the required educational qualification for the post of Nursing Tutor is as per Rule 3(b). The qualification for the post of Nursing Tutor is as per Rule 3(b)(i), B.Sc. Degree in nursing with 30 years experience as staff nurse in hospital or post basis B.Sc. Degree in nursing or Diploma in Nursing Education. It is submitted that as per the Rules, the above degrees are required to be obtained from the University /Institution, which is recognize by the Indian Nursing Council and State Nursing Council. It is pertinent to note at this juncture that PHN Course is not recognized by Indian Nursing Council or State Nursing Council. It is approved by the Government of Gujarat in the year 1994 only with a view to give employment to the ladies in rural areas, which is stated in Clause-(iv) of Para-2 of GR dated 23.10/11.1994.
2.2 It is submitted that in the year 1991 to 1994 and thereafter from 1994 till date, the petitioners are continuously subjected to discrimination. It is submitted that had the respondents not prepared common seniority list of B.Sc. /PHN /diploma Holders of Staff Nurses then the petitioners might have been promoted to the post of Nursing Tutors first in point of time than the candidates who are having PHN Degree. In the year 2001-02, the respondents prepared another common seniority list of nursing tutor. Therefore, now there are all chances to give promotion to the persons who are less qualified, i.e. the persons who are having PHN degree to the post of Principal and therefore, the action of the respondents is required to be quashed and set aside by this Court.
2.3 It is submitted that respondent Nos.6 to 10 herein were promoted to the post of Nursing Tutor from the post of Staff Nurses in the year 1990 to 1994. It is submitted that the petitioners were also working as Staff Nurses and having required qualification, i.e. B.Sc. (Nursing) for being promoted to the post of Nursing Tutor, but the respondent authorities, ignoring the Rules of Indian Nursing Council and notification issued by the Government of Gujarat, promoted persons like respondent Nos.6 to 10, who are having PHN degree. Thus, the petitioners are subjected to discrimination at the cost of the persons like respondent Nos.6 to 10. Therefore, the action of the respondent authorities is required to be quashed and set aside and the petitioners herein are required to be given deemed date from the date of when such less qualified persons like respondent Nos.6 to 10 were promoted to the post of Nursing Tutor.
2.4 It is submitted that the petitioners made representation to the respondents ventilating their grievances, i.e. in not promoting the petitioners to the post of Nursing Tutor in Nursing Schools throughout the State of Gujarat. But, till today, the petitioners have not received any reply from the respondents. Therefore, all the petitioners compelled to file