IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2814 of 2020 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J. SHELAT ==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No ✓

==========================================================

VORA MAHMADHUSEN JIVABHAI Versus MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER & ORS.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR P J YAGNIK(1004) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR HAMESH C NAIDU(5335) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J. SHELAT Date : 16/03/2026

JUDGMENT

1. Heard Mr. P. J. Yagnik, learned Advocate for the petitioner, and Mr. Hamesh C. Naidu, learned Advocate for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:

“A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to admit and allow this Special Civil Application.

B) This Hon'ble Court will be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents authorities to grant the promotion to the petitioner as head driver as per seniority list which was being continued by the Central office with all the applicable pay scale and consequential benefits a per Annexure -D dtd; 28/6/2017 and as per Seniority List dtd: 5/7/2016 prepared by the Respondent No.1 Municipal Commissioner At Annexure –

C.

C) Be pleased to direct the respondent authorities not to appoint any person other than the present Petitioner as head driver as per seniority list prepared by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation which is at ANN. C.

D) Pending, admission, hearing and till final haring of this petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities not to appoint the junior head persons as had Driver or In-charge Head Driver to the post of Head Driver for which Petitioner is legally entitled to hold the post.

E) Be pleased to direct the Respondent authorities to pay unpaid salary to the Petitioner F) Pending, admission, hearing and till final haring of this petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the Respondent Authorities to allow the Petitioner to discharge his duties as Head Driver in Respondent Corporation's Office with present pay scale and all consequential benefits.

OR Be pleased to direct the Respondent authorities to place the Petitioner as head Driver in the office of Respondent no. 4 as Head Driver with all prevailing pay scale and all consequential benefits.

G) Be pleased to grant such other and further relief/s which may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”

3. At the outset, it is required to be observed that by way of this petition, the petitioner is seeking promotion as head driver. The petitioner was working as driver with the respondent- Corporation, and the record suggests that he was appointed as in-charge head driver by the Corporation in the year 2017 but his pay was never changed. Even there was no formal order of any promotion given to the petitioner by the Corporation. It is settled position of law that the right to claim promotion is not a fundamental right, unlike right to consider it for promotion. The respondent-Corporation has filed its reply opposing the prayer made in the petition, contending inter alia that at no point of time, the petitioner was promoted to the post of head driver, rather when he was deputed as driver in central workshop of the Corporation, petitioner had stopped coming for work. The petitioner was served with show-cause notice. The Corporation appears to have taken very lenient view in the matter as the petitioner was going to be superannuated on 31.07.2021, hence, a minor penalty of stoppage of one increment for one year has been imposed by the Corporation vide its order dated 02.02.2021.

4. Mr. Yagnik, learned Advocate for the petitioner, would not be in a position to make any submission as regards to