Back
A. S. SUPEHIA, MAUNA M. BHATT
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Mahesh Sureshbhai Parmar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. Admit. The respective advocates appearing for the respondents waive service of notice of admission.
2. The captioned group of Letters Patent Appeals are directed against the common judgement and order dated 03.08.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in the captioned writ petitions. The writ petitions are filed by the Foresters, who are working under the appellant-Forest and Environment Department. The issue before the learned Single Judge raised by the writ petitioners was that the action of the respondent authorities - appellants in treating them as fresh appointees and also affecting their seniority.
3. Letters Patent Appeal No.129 of 2024 in Special Civil Application No.3813 of 2021 is taken as a lead matter with consent of the learned advocates.
BRIEF FACTS
4. The appellants of Letters Patent Appeal No.1 of 2024(writ petitioners of Special Civil Application No.7585 of 2020) have prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 11.06.2020 passed by the Chief Conservator of Forest, Junagadh circle, whereby he has issued the provisional seniority list wherein, the Foresters, who have not passed the exam of CCC, were also
The court established that once employees are regularized, they cannot be treated as fresh appointees based on subsequent examination results, especially when prior qualifications were valid.
Notification which has amended Rule 9A by inserting words “or within a period of two years thereafter” after the words “contractual basis” under Sub-rule(3) of Rule 9A of Rules, 1967 and Government R....
Termination conditions post-regularization cannot be applied retrospectively, ensuring employees maintain their original seniority status.
The court reaffirmed that amendments to employment regulations should apply prospectively, preventing unjust termination based on retrospective rule applications, especially under pandemic circumstan....
The court established that training periods for direct recruits are not counted as service until successful completion, impacting seniority rights.
Statutory rules prevail over government resolutions in determining seniority and service requirements.
Officers are entitled to Senior Time Scale upon completing four years of service, irrespective of passing departmental exams; their substantive rights are protected.
The period of officiating service of temporary AEEs appointed between 1990-1992 must be counted for seniority, entitling them to be placed above the 1997 batch of regularly appointed candidates.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
