Oral Order :-

(cid:9)This petition is filed by the petitioners for an appropriate writ, direction or order, quashing and setting aside an action of the High Court of Gujarat (respondent herein) in not calling them for consideration for being included in Select List for promotion to the post of Section Officers on the establishment of the respondent. The said action is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of their fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India.

(cid:9)It is the case of the petitioners that they are working in the High Court. They have joined services under the establishment of the High Court as Junior Clerks between 1969 and 1978. They were promoted to the post of Assistants, except petitioner No.1, who was appointed as Translator, and is working as such. According to the petitioners, all of them are eligible under the Rules to be considered for promotion and / or selection to the post of Section Officer in the pay scale of Rs.2000-3500. However, for one reason or the other, their cases have not been considered and they were not called for interview. The said action of the respondent-High Court is illegal, ultra vires, arbitrary, unreasonable and requires to be interfered with by this Court. At the time of admission, following order was passed on April 21, 1995 :-

"... Before the matter could proceed for admission hearing the Ld. Registrar of this Court has filed a statement in this petition. Pursuant to this statement, Mr.Padiwal, L.A. seeks permission to withdraw this petition at this stage. Permission granted. Disposed of accordingly...."

Thereafter, on the same day, further order was passed :-

"... After the above order was passed, Mr.Padiwal submits that he has instructions to pray for recalling the above order on the ground that some persons other than 35 persons, who are already working as Section Officers on ad hoc are called for interview. He is permitted to revive this petition. The aforesaid order is recalled.

Heard Mr.Padiwal. Notice returnable on 28/4/95. It would be open to Mr.Padiwal to present the case of the petitioners before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice since according to the say of Mr.Padiwal, a representation dtd. 19/4/95 has already been given by one of the petitioners to the Ld. Registrar of this Court. However, it is made clear that the process of interview is not stayed...."

Pursuant of the notice issued by this Court, respondent appeared and an affidavit-in-reply is filed by Mr.J.K. Patel, Registrar of the respondent-High Court. Today, the matter is called out for hearing.

(cid:9)Mr.A.D. Padiwal, learned counsel for the petitioners, raised various contentions. He contended that under the Rules, the petitioners are eligible to be considered for promotional post of Section Officers, and yet they were not called for interview. He submitted that looking to the record and reading affidavit-in-reply, it is clear that the respondent-High Court has now come forward with the case that the petitioners are not eligible for Section Officers, but since New Rules have come into force, and they are eligible under the New Rules, their cases are required to be considered. It was also argued that the petitioners were called for interview and letters were addressed. Subsequently, however, they were withdrawn. The counsel submitted that the petition is filed against the respondent-High Court on administrative side. As per settled law, the administrative side of the High Court is expected to place all relevant record on the judicial side of the High Court. Except bare assertion on the part of the Registrar of the respondent-High Court, nothing was placed on record by the respondent-High court as to why letters calling the petitioners for interview were cancelled and they were treated as ineligible. Relying on Office Order dated June 30, 1993, Annexure `D' to affidavit-in-rejoinder, it was contended that the respondent-High Court itself was of the opinion that after coming into force of