Back
2025 Supreme(Guj) 1254
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.S. SUPEHIA, R. T. VACHHANI, JJ.
Gujarat Public Service Commission - Appellant
Versus
Digvijaysinh Mahendrasinh Chavda & Ors. – Respondents
R/Letters Patent Appeal No. 1111 of 2015 In R/Special Civil Application No. 13857 of 2014 With Civil Application (For Direction) No. 1 of 2016 In R/Letters Patent Appeal No. 1111 of 2015 With Civil Application (For Direction) No. 1 of 2020 In R/Letters Patent Appeal No. 1111 of 2015
Decided On : 06-08-2025
For the Appellant : Mr. DG. Shukla.
For the Respondents:Mr Shalin Mehta, Senior Advocate With Mr Shashvata U. Shukla With Mr S.P. Majmudar, and Mr H.J. Karathiya, Mr HET N SHAH, Mr. Aakash Gupta, AGP, Mr Sandip M. Patel, Mr Vaibhav A. Vyas.
The court ruled that recruitment practices must strictly adhere to rules without arbitrary deviations, ensuring fairness in selecting candidates based on established criteria.
Headnote:(A) Gujarat Public Service Commission Amendment Rules, 2009 - Proviso to Rule 3 - Recruitment process for Forest Services - Issues regarding the fixation of qualifying standard and distribution of posts among candidates with specified qualifications based on Forestry.
(B) The court highlighted the importance of adhering to recruitment rules and avoiding arbitrary deviations in the selection process.
(C) The court found that 25% vacancies should be filled by candidates with Forestry as a principal subject, as per the Recruitment Rules.
(D) The main issues addressed were the legitimacy of awarding bonus marks and the proper interpretation of 'as far as practicable' in the Recruitment Rules. (E) The court’s reasoning emphasized that arbitrary application of qualifications is unjustifiable and against constitutional principles, reaffirming fair recruitment practices. (F) The court quashed the appellant's selection list and directed the formation of a fresh selection list following the correct rules. (G) Parties involved: The appellant-Commission and private respondents with Forestry degrees. (H) No dissenting opinions were mentioned.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal procedure and relevant notifications (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. recruitment process and allocation of bonus marks (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. arguments regarding recruitment rules and qualifications (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. responses to arguments about bonus marks and eligibility (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. previous judgement relevance and ongoing appeal (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. analysis of recruitment criteria and discriminatory practices (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 7. court's finding on merit and process flaws (Para 20 , 21) |
| 8. final orders and implications for recruitment process (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
JUDGMENT :
A.S. SUPEHIA, J.
1. The present appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, 1895 is directed against the judgement and order dated 11.06.2015 passed by the learned Single Judge in the captioned writ petition being Special Civil Application No.13587 of 2014 and allied matters.
2. The group of writ petitions, in which other issues are raised, is also decided by the learned Single Judge vide common judgement and order dated 11.06.2015. So far as the issue, which is raised in the captioned writ petition and appeal is concerned, the same is confined to the Notification dated 18.05.2009 issued by the Forest and Environment Department amending the Gujarat Forest Service, Class-II RECRUITMENT RULES , 2007 more particularly, Rule 3 thereof and the Proviso therein, which stipulates about filling up 25% vacancies of direct recruits from the appointing candidates, who possess B.Sc. degree with Forestry as a principal subject, as far as practicable. Another issue, which was also raised herein, is relating to the action of granting 7% bonus marks to a candidate, who possesses B.Sc. Degree with Forestry as principal subject.
BRIEF FACTS:
3. On 01.03.2010, the appellant-Commission i.e. Gujarat Public Services Commission issued an advertisement for filling up 47 posts of Assistant Conservator of Forest (Class-II) (for short “the ACF”) and 120 post of Range Forest Officer (Class-II) (for short “the RFO”). In the advertisement, it was stipulated that as far as practicable 25% posts shall be filled in from the candidates, who possess B.Sc. having Forestry as their main degree / subject. Primary examination of 150 marks and the main examination would be of 700 marks followed by oral interview i.e. viva voce of 70 marks. The private respondents No.1 to 11 (original petitioners) participated in the recruitment process. All the private respondents have Forestry as their main subject in B.Sc. Degree.
4. The State Government on 25.09.2014 issued a further notification stipulating that those candidates, who possess the B.Sc. Degree with Forestry as their principal subject will be given bonus 7% marks in addition to the marks they have obtained in the written examination and viva voce. The said notification refers to the decision of the appellant-Commission dated 15.04.2013. It is the case of the private respondents that when they had received their call letters for their main examination, it was stated therein that they would be given benefit of 7% bonus marks. When the select list was notified vide Notification dated 25.09.2014, names of the private respondents did not appear and it appeared in Part-2 list of the unsuccessful candidates, which was issued vide notification dated 25.09.2014. It appears that their names were not included as they obtained less marks than the qualifying standard for the respective categories even after addition of 7% bonus marks. Qualifying standard of General male category appears to be 429 marks, whereas for SEBC male category, the same is of 375 marks, for Schedule Caste male category it is of 387 marks and for Schedule Tribe male category it is of 316 marks. This led to filing of the writ petition(s).
5. Learned Single Judge, while deciding the group of petitions, including the captioned writ petition with other issues, allowed the writ petitions filed by the private respondents. Being aggrieved, the appellant-Commission has
