IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15466 of 2019 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

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

Approved for Reporting Yes No √

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

SOLANKI HARIBHAI DANABHAI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MRS KRISHNA G RAWAL(1315) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MS FORUM BIMAL SUKHADWALA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,3 MR AMAR D MITHANI(484) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT Date : 10/03/2026

JUDGMENT

1. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned AGP Ms. Forum Bimal Sukhadwala waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent nos.1 and 3 and learned advocate Mr. Amar Mithani waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.2.

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

“(A) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ în the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and to hold and declare that the respondents have no authority, power or competence to force the petitioner to produce the document which is not in existence and, therefore, the action of the respondent deserves to be quashed and set aside to the extent of calling upon the petitioner to produce the hall ticket;

(B) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and to quash and set aside the decision of the respondent of not giving the merits of Master of Education only on the ground that the petitioner failed to produce the hall ticket;

(C) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and to direct the respondent to consider the merits of the petitioner including the merits of the Master of Education and direct the respondent to place the petitioner at appropriate place between 263 to 265 in the merit list and further direct the respondent to issue the order of appointment to the petitioner as per her merits; D) Pending admission and final disposal of the present petition, be pleased to stay the implementation, operation and execution of the impugned order of the respondent of not considering the merits of the petitioner the Master of Education;

(E) Pending admission and final disposal of the present petition, be pleased to direct the respondent to issue provisional order of appointment to the petitioner as per the merits of the petitioner as if the petitioner is placed at sr. no. between 263 to 265 and/or alternatively direct the respondent to keep one post vacant.

(F) Be pleased to pass such other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper.”

3. Heard learned advocate Ms. Krishna Rawal for the petitioner and Mr. Amar Mithani for the respondent no.2.

4. At the outside, learned advocate Mr. Mithani for the respondent no.2 has drawn attention of this Court that there is a clear suppression of material facts by petitioner when approach this Court seeking retiral benefits as demanded by petitioner vide his representation dated 26.02.2012. It is submitted that such benefit was already released and paid to the petitioner in July 2012 and November 2012, respectively, i.e., much prior to filing the present petition, in the year 2019.

4.1 Mr. Mithani, learned advocate would also submit that for the first time in this petition, petitioner has such claiming pensionary benefits otherwise prior to filing this petition, at no point of time, petitioner raised any claim of pension. It is not in dispute between the parties that prior to filing this petition, at no point of time; petitioner ever raised any demand of pension from respondent.

5. The aforesaid statement of fact is not cont