Back
2023 Supreme(Guj) 1299
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ., N.V. ANJARIA, J.
Hardik Pradipbhai Joshi - Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1313 of 2022 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16396 of 2019 With R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1314 of 2022 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 18485 of 2019 With R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1315 of 2022 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 18921 of 2019 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2022 With R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1318 of 2022 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17521 of 2019 With R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1319 of 2022 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 18352 of 2019 With R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1316 of 2022 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16165 of 2019 With R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1321 of 2022 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17791 of 2019 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2022 With R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1320 of 2022 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 18831 of 2019 With R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1317 of 2022 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17792 of 2019 With R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1360 of 2022 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16676 of 2020 With R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1359 of 2022 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6771 of 2020 With R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1358 of 2022 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6899 of 2022 With R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 112 of 2023 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7038 of 2021 With R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1050 of 2023 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14695 of 2019
Decided On : 03-11-2023
For the Appellants : MR. EKRAMA H QURESHI, MR. S.P. MAJMUDAR, ULLASH N. GOHIL.
For the Respondents: MS. MANISHA L. SHAH, GP WITH SIDDHARTH RAMI, AGP WITH JEENAL ACHARYA, AGP, MR. RUTVIJ R PATEL, MR. ALKESH SHAH.
Ad-hoc appointments do not confer a right to continue in service once regularly selected candidates become available, reinforcing employment law principles regarding temporary roles.
Headnote:(A) Gujarat Public Service Commission Act - Government Resolution dated 07.02.2020, 29.02.2020 and 27.07.2020 - Termination of ad-hoc lecturers' services due to their inability to continue after the selection of permanent candidates - Regular selection must take precedence over ad-hoc appointments. (Paras 5, 5.1, 5.5)
(B) Employment Law - Ad-hoc employees lack permanent rights to positions, and cannot claim jobs once regularly appointed candidates are available. (Paras 5.1, 5.4)
Facts of the case:
The appellants, serving as ad-hoc lecturers in Engineering, challenged their termination following Government Resolutions that reduced educational capacity and adjusted faculty strength based on student-teacher ratios.
Findings of Court:
The state’s decision to reduce intake and thereby decrease sanctioned posts was justifiable and based on empirical evidence.
Issues: Whether the termination of ad-hoc lecturers violated their rights and the legality of the Government Resolutions impacting faculty strength.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that temporary or ad-hoc appointments cease automatically once candidates from a formal selection process become available for the role.
Result: Appeals dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. multiple appeals arise from a common judgment regarding employment status. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. resolutions based on expert study led to employment terminations due to the student-teacher ratio. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. affirms the dismissal of all appeals due to lack of merit. (Para 10 , 11) |
JUDGMENT :
(N.V. Anjaria, J.)
These Letters Patent Appeals, fourteen in numbers, arise from common judgment and order dated 07.10.2022 of learned Single Judge dismissing the Special Civil Applications filed by the appellants-original petitioners.
1.1 Since the facts have common thread and the issues involved are identical, all the appeals were heard together to be disposed of simultaneously by this judgment.
2. Heard learned advocates Mr. Ekrama Kureshi, Mr. S.P. Majmudar and Mr. Ullash Gohil for the appellants appearing in the respective appeals, whereas learned Government Pleader Ms. Manisha L. Shah assisted by learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Siddharth Rami with learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Jeenal Acharya in all the appeals on behalf of the State and its authorities.
2.1 Letters Patent Appeal No. 1313 of 2012 was treated as main along with Letters Patent Appeals No. 1314 of 2022 to 1321 of 2022. Letters Patent Appeal No. 1360 of 2022 and rest of the Appeals was a different batch, but cognate involving the same controversy.
2.2 Referring to prayer made in Special Civil Application No. 16396 of 2019, corresponding to Letters Patent Appeal No. 1313 of 2012 and all other petitions containing similar prayers, it was prayed to direct the respondents not to terminate the services of the petitioners as ad-hoc Lecturers (Class II), Mechanical or Electrical, as the case may be without considering the petitioners for continuation on the existing post in the branch concerned at the Government Polytechnic Colleges where they are posted.
2.3 The other prayer was to direct the respondents to give the chance to the petitioners for competing in the Limited Competitive Examination for the purpose of regular appointment to the post of Lecturer (Class II).
2.4 In rest of the Letters Patent Appeals, led by Letters Patent Appeal No. 1360 of 2022 with Letters Patent Appeals No. 1358 of 2022, 1359 of 2022, 112 of 2023 and 1050 of 2023, the prayers were made to set aside Resolution dated 07.02.2020 and 29.02.2020 as also subsequent Resolution dated 27.07.2020 passed by the Education Department of the State Government. The direction was prayed for against the respondent no.1-Education Department to calculate the sanctioned post of Professors (Class I), Associate Professors (Class-II) or Assistant Professors (Class-II) in the Government Engineering Colleges, considering the student-teacher ratio to 1:15 and considering the EWS, TFW and Diploma to Degree D to D students in the Government Engineering Colleges.
2.5 It was also the prayer to direct the respondent no.3 All India Council of Technical Education to include supernumerary students for admission in calculation of student:teacher ratio along with the approved intake at all years of under graduate posts in Engineering institutions. The petitioners wanted to fix the student:teacher ration uniformly of 1:15 for under graduate programme in all Engineering Institutions.
2.6 In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1313 of 2022 and other connected appeals, the principal prayer initially was against the termination of the services, by moving an amendment, the petitioners inserted the prayer to set aside the Resolution dated 07.02.2020 and 27.07.2020 of the Education Department insofar as they related to the Mechanical branch.
2.7 In other words, all the petitions contained similar prayers in two limbs, one against termination of services as ad-hoc lecturers and other to set aside the aforementioned resolutions. For the said Resolutions, the petitioners apprehended that since the Resolutions provided for reduction in the number of faculties, their services would be automatically brought to an end. The appellants-pe
