Gujarat High Court
Tejendrakumar Babubhai Parmar vs The State Of Gujarat on 11 August, 2025
Author: Nikhil S. Kariel
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/11103/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11103 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✓
==========================================================
TEJENDRAKUMAR BABUBHAI PARMAR & ORS.
Versus
THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RIYAZ R PARMAR(11846) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,10,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
MS NIRALI SARDA, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s)
No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 11/08/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Riyaz Parmar appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms.Nirali Sarda appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.
2. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought for the following prayers:-
"(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or writ in nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order and/or direction, Page 1 of 6 Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Thu Aug 14 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 14 21:43:14 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11103/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/08/2025 undefined directing the respondent authorities to reconsider the candidature of the petitioners for the post of Kanyaan Tantrik Madadnish (Junior Technical Assistant) and further be pleased to permit them to submit the Licentiate Certificate in General Insurance within a reasonable and stipulated time-frame, preferably after the declaration of results of the September 2025 examination in which the Petitioners are already enrolled and due to appear, in the interest of justice;
(B) Your Lordships may further be pleased to direct the respondents authorities to provisionally consider the petitioners as successful candidates in the recruitment process initiated under Advertisement No.220/2023-24 for the post of Kanyaan Tantrik Madadnish (Junior Technical Assistant) and to recommend their names for appointment, subject to the production of the Licentiate Certificate within the time so granted, in the interest of justice; as Annexure-A (C) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the present petition, Your Lordship may be pleased to stay the effect, implementation and operation of the rejection notification dated 19.07.2025 Annexure-
E issued by the Gujarat Subordinate Services Selection Board (GSSSB) whereby the petitioners were declared unsuccessful on the sole ground of non-submission of the Licentiate Certificate; and further Your Lordships may further be pleased to direct the respondents authorities to provisionally consider the petitioners as successful candidates in the recruitment process initiated under Advertisement No.220/2023-24 as Annexure-A for the post of Kanyaan Tantrik Madadnish (Junior Technical Assistant) and to recommend their names for appointment, subject to the production of the Licentiate Certificate within the time so granted, in the interest of justice;
(D) Your Lordships may be pleased to grant such other and further relief as may be deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and Page 2 of 6 Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Thu Aug 14 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 14 21:43:14 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11103/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/08/2025 undefined in the interest of justice."
3. It is the case of the petitioner that he had applied for selection to the post of Junior Technical Assistant as advertised by respondent no.2 and whereas, one of the eligibility criteria as mentioned in the advertisement was possession of Licentiate Certificate of General Insurance subject from Insurance Institution of India. 3.1. It appears that the petitioners had applied for selection and whereas, though selected, the selection process for the said post had been canceled by the respondent no.2 on the ground that after the prelims examination, upon verification, it was found that selected candidates did not have the above referred certificate.
4. Learned advocate Mr.Parmar would submit that in an advertisement by the respondent authorities in an earlier recruitment in the year 2016-17, the qualification of Licentiate Certificate was not there and whereas, the candidates were only required to have diploma in Insurance or an equivalent certificate. Learned advocate would submit that since a different qualification is required in the earlier recruitment process, therefore, the reliance upon the Licentiate Certificate Page 3 of 6 Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Thu Aug 14 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 14 21:43:14 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11103/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/08/2025 undefined was erroneous and whereas, this Court may direct the respondents to also consider the diploma in Insurance as being a relevant consideration.
5. As against the same, learned AGP Ms.Sarda would tender a copy of the recruitment rules which clearly specifies that a candidate should have a Licentiate Certificate referred to hereinabove. Learned AGP would submit that the concerned certificate is a qualification as per the recruitment rules, the respondent no.2 could not be faulted in issuing advertisement for filling up of vacancies for the post in question with the said relevant qualification. Learned AGP would further submit that the petitioners admittedly not having such certificate, may not be entitled to any relief from this Court.
6. Having heard the learned advocate Mr.Parmar and learned AGP Ms.Sarda, to this Court, it would appear that the entire petition is misconceived. The basis for the petition, as could be culled out, being that in an advertisement for the year 2016-17, the requirement was different than the requirement in an advertisement for the same post in the year 2023-24 and whereas, upon perusal of the recruitment rules, Page 4 of 6 Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Thu Aug 14 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 14 21:43:14 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11103/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/08/2025 undefined it would be evident that the said rules have been framed on 17.08.2020. It would clearly appear that the said rules were after the advertisement being relied upon by learned advocate Mr.Parmar and whereas, if a recruitment rule has been promulgated after the advertisement, the requirement as mentioned in the prior advertisement, would be of no consequences upon the recruitment rule coming out with a different set of qualification. Unless the recruitment rule is questioned on its validity, respondent no.2 could not be in any manner whatsoever faulted with having relied upon the requirement as found in the recruitment rule. 6.1. To this Court, it would appear that once the qualification for being appointed to a post has been fixed by framing of the recruitment rules, then it would be that qualification which would be the relevant and necessary qualification which an aspirant for the post should possess if he wants to join the selection process. Upon a recruitment rule being framed, all the qualifications which were hitherto deemed appropriate in selection process prior to the framing of the recruitment rule, would be of no consequence at all.
7. Under such circumstances, to this Court, as noted Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Thu Aug 14 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 14 21:43:14 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11103/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/08/2025 undefined hereinabove, the petition being misconceived, there is no requirement of entertaining the present writ petition and the same is disposed of as rejected.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J) Bhoomi Page 6 of 6 Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Thu Aug 14 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 14 21:43:14 IST 2025