IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that age limits and the status of pending inquiries are critical eligibility criteria for training programs in public service.

ORDER :

Vaibhavi D. Nanavati, J.

1. Heard Mr. Sandip H. Munjyasara, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Ms. Pooja K. Ashar, learned AGP appearing for the respondents.

2. The petitioner herein came to be appointed as Medical Officer, Class -II, on 18.03.1997 and is serving at Community Health Centre (CHC) at Khavda, Tal. Bhuj-Kachchh. The State Government floated a scheme for in-service training program/course of Diploma in Public Health and Management (DPHM) and other courses for Medical Officers of the State. As per the Government Gazette dated 02.11.1989 and 14.11.1989, the Medical Officer, who has completed this course of DPHM, would be entitled to get promotion in the higher post of ADHO and CDHO and more higher post like Additional Director in H & FW Department. As per the said scheme, the Government would bear the entire expenses of the course. The Government would be deputing the Medical Officer in DPHM training as per the H & FW department Government Resolution dated 29.08.1986.

2.1 As per the scheme, the respondent No.3 issued a Circular on 08.12.2011 inviting applications from the Medical Officers within the seniority nos.1828 to 1950, age below 45 years on 01.01.2012, passed M.B.B.S in one trial and willing to join the said course of DPHM. The said Circular is duly produced at Annexure – D. The petitioner applied for the aforesaid on 12.12.2011. The name of the petitioner was included in the seniority list at serial no.8 having seniority no.1927; duly produced at Annexure – E, however, the petitioner’s name did not figure in the select list; to be eligible for the said training.

2.2 Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred Special Civil Application No.604 of 2012 for a direction to the respondents to depute the petitioner for the DPHM course at his own cost. By order dated 26.04.2012, it was observed that the petitioner were to pursue DPHM course at his own cost and therefore, the respondents were directed to decide the application in this background and in accordance with law. Being aggrieved by the said observation, the petitioner preferred Letters Patent Appeal No.1017 of 2012 on the ground that the statement with regard to willingness to join the course at his own expense was made because of petitioner’s miscommunication. The Hon’ble Division Bench vide order dated 21.02.2023 permitted the petitioner to withdraw Special Civil Application No.604 of 2012 with a liberty to file a fresh application with regard to the said subject matter.

2.3 In light of the aforesaid, the petitioner gave fresh application on 12.03.2013 for deputing the petitioner for DPHM course and requested to consider his case. The respondent No.2 by communication dated 20.04.2013 directed the petitioner to apply through the respondent No.4 as and when the Government issued a Circular with regard to the DPHM course by the Trivandrum Institute for the year 2014.

2.4 The petitioner once again applied on 23.01.2014 for the said course. Since the same was not replied to by the respondents, the petitioner preferred Special Civil Application No.10907 of 2014. By order dated 10.10.2014, the respondent authority was directed to take a decision upon the petitioner’s representation. In due compliance to the said order, the petitioner was informed by a communication dated 20.10.2014 that the petitioner had completed 45 years in the year 2014 and his case could not be considered. The respondent No.3 by letter dated 20.10.2014, confirmed by the Government, was informed to the petitioner by the respondent – State on 25.02.2015.

2.5 It is the case of the petitioner that there was remark on the file that ‘if the petitioner aged more than 45 years is permitted in special case for training of DPHM, than it will set an example and more demands may arise which would be difficult to negate’. On 31.08.2015, the petitioner once again requested to depute the petitioner in DPHM course in the next batch with clarification that whatever may be stated or