JUDGMENT :

A.Y. KOGJE, J.

1. RULE. Learned AGP Mr. Ayaan Patel waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondents.

2. The present petition is filed seeking direction of this Court to appoint the petitioners as Lokrakshak (Constable) Unarmed (Male) SEBC category with all consequential benefits, back wages and to direct the respondents to issue appointment letter with a further direction to quash and set aside unfit certificate issued by the respondents.

2.1 It is the case of the petitioners that pursuant to advertisement No. PRB/201415/1 for direct recruitment of various posts of PSI, ASI, Armed and Unarmed Police Constables-Class-III, the petitioners, being eligible and qualified, applied for the same. The petitioners successfully cleared written and main examination and oral interview. The petitioners were informed about his selection in the unarmed category.

2.2 After selection, the petitioners were sent for medical examination at Civil Hospital, Surat, where they were declared unfit as having colour vision blindness.

3. According to learned Advocate for the petitioners, this issue is very much covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Court as well as decision of Division Bench of this Court and therefore, action of discontinuation on the ground of colour vision is ex-facie impermissible.

3.1 It is submitted that the petitioners are fully eligible and has successfully cleared process of recruitment, but it is only on account of colour vision issue, on the opinion given by the Board of Referees that they are deprived of actual appointment and this issue according to learned Advocate for the petitioners is squarely covered by decision of this Court in past and as such the petitioners have requested the Court to deal with and dispose of the petitions.

4. As against this, learned AGP for the respondent-State authority pointed out that all the petitioners have approached the Court at a belated stage. By virtue of resolution dated 21.3.2017, it would be open for the respondent authority to put an end to the services even if, taken on job without issuance of notice. A further contention is also raised that it was expected by all the petitioners to submit an appeal before appropriate authority against certificate issued by the Medical Officer. No such appeal is filed by the petitioner. It is further pointed out that it may be that Co-ordinate Bench as well as Division Bench of this Court has taken decision in favour of concerned petitioners on this very issue, but the State Government has already preferred Special Leave Petition which is lying with Diary Number 12397 of 2020 in Apex Court and as such, the State appears to have taken a stand that since the State Government has challenged the decision of Division Bench of this Court, in Supreme Court the petitions may not be entertained.

4.1 However, there is nothing on record to show that any notice is issued or even any interim relief is granted by the Apex Court simply and at a diary number stage the State Appeal is pending. With this background learned AGP for the State Authority has attempted to oppose this petition, but has candidly submitted that issue is dealt with in past by this Court and it was decided against the State Authority on the issue of colour vision being suffered by candidate and as such learned AGP has ultimately submitted that even if an eventuality to take place to allow the petitioner to be reinstated then liberty be kept open for the State authority to specifically mention in their appointment that such appointment would be subject to the result of the decision being take by Hon’ble Apex Court in Special Leave Petition.

5. With these submissions, learned AGP has fairly left the issue to the discretion of the Court with no much resistance. No other submissions have been made.

6. Having heard learned advocates for the parties and having gone through the aforesaid factual background of the case, it appears that the petitioners are deprived of appointment o