Askani Rubinaben Mahmadhanif vs State of Gujarat

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Guj) 1761

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Nikhil S. Kariel, J.
Askani Rubinaben Mahmadhanif & others – Petitioners
Versus
The State of Gujarat & others – Respondents
R/Special Civil Application No. 3808, 5403, 3813, 5076, 9752, 9762, 3813, 5076 of 2021, R/Special Civil Application No. 7585, 13202, 13555, 13620, 12543, 13384, 14974, 7585, 13202, 13620, 12543, 14974 of 2020, Civil Application (For Joining Party) No. 1 of 2020, Civil Application (For Direction) No. 2 of 2021
Decided On : 03-08-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr G.M. Joshi, Ld. Sr. Advocate With Mr Vyom H Shah
For the Respondent: Mr Utkarsh Sharma, AGP

Headnote:
Gujarat Civil Services Classification and Recruitment (General) Rules, 1967 – Rule 8(1)(a) – Gujarat Civil Services Computer Competency Training and Examination Rules, 2006 – Rule 9 – Course on Computer Concepts – Department of Electronics Accreditation for Computer Courses – Held, Respondent Authorities are directed to make consequential changes in seniority position of petitioners, except petitioners of Special Civil Application as per conclusion and direction herein above and whereas any and all orders of respondent Authorities, whereby adverse consequences were to be imposed upon petitioners for non-passing of CCC Examination within stipulated period of time after entry in service are declared as being arbitrary and illegal and are to be treated as quashed and set aside – Appropriate consequential effects shall be given by respondent Authorities within a period of eight weeks from today – Ordered accordingly.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned Sr. Advocate Mr.G. M. Joshi appearing with learned Advocate Mr.Vyom Shah for the petitioners in SCA Nos.3813, 3808 & 13620 of 2021, Nos.14974 & 12543 of 2020, learned Advocate Mr.Nikul Soni appearing for the petitioners in SCA Nos.5076, 9762, 5403 & 9752 of 2021, learned Advocate Mr.N.Y. Shukla for the petitioners in SCA No.13202 of 2020, learned Advocate Mr.Ratanpara appearing for the petitioners in SCA No.13384 & 13555 of 2020, learned Advocate Mr.H. C. Buch for learned Advocate Mr.Abhisst Thaker for the petitioners in SCA No.7585 of 2020, and learned AGP Mr.Utkarsh Sharma for the respondent State in all the matters.

2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Advocates appearing for the respective respondents waive service of Rule.

3. In the present group of petitions, the petitioners are more or less seeking similar prayers and raising common issues and, therefore, they are taken up together for final disposal.

4. This Court is called upon to decide the period during which the petitioners were required to clear Course on Computer Concepts (herein after ‘CCC’ for short) Examination as per the policy of the State Government in this regard, therefore, facts as much as relevant for the purpose of deciding the present group of petitions would be narrated herein after. At this stage, this Court observes that since there appears to have been certain developments in the interregnum, which may vary from petitioner to petitioner and whereas since it also clearly appears to this Court that the issue involved is common, this Court does not propose to deal with individual facts and also orders passed by the State Government in case of individual petitioners and whereas this Court deems it appropriate to observe that based upon the final findings of this Court, necessary and appropriate final order would be passed. At this stage, it is further clarified that while individual facts may not be touched upon, but at the same time, none of the relevant facts necessary for deciding the present petitions is being left out, and whereas it is to ensure unnecessary repetition of the facts, more particularly since it appears to this Court that a legal issue is involved, such a course is being adopted.

5. All the petitioners in this group of petitions were originally appointed as Forest Guards during the period between 2007 to 2009, except four petitioners of Special Civil Application No.7585 of 2020. It would also be relevant to mention here that the petitioners as per the extant policy of the State Government had been appointed on five years fixed term and fixed salary based contract and whereas upon successful completion of such appointment, the petitioners were to be appointed in regular pay-scale.

6. It also appears that some of the petitioners have been promoted to the post of Foresters and whereas on account of the Department considering the petitioners as having not cleared the CCC Examination, either they have been reverted or some of the petitioners are apprehending reversion. At the same time, remaining petitioners are apprehending their non-promotion on account of the Department considering the petitioners as having not cleared the CCC Examination, during the period stipulated.

7. At this stage, it also requires to be mentioned that all the petitioners have cleared the CCC Examination twice, i.e. once at the stage of entry in service and the second time at a later stage i.e. between 2016 to 2019 generally, further there is not a single petitioner in this group of petitions, who has not cleared CCC Examination and whereas the issue which this Court is called upon to decide his as to what would be the period during which the petitioners as per the policy of the Government prevalent be required to pass the CCC Examination.

8. The main contention on behalf of the petitioners being that during the period when the petitioners had joined service, as per the policy of the State Government prevalent at that time, passing of CCC Exa