Patel Anilkumar Amrutbhai vs State Of Gujarat

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 7900 Guj
Judgement Date : 13 November, 2025

Gujarat High Court

Patel Anilkumar Amrutbhai vs State Of Gujarat on 13 November, 2025

Author: Nirzar S. Desai
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
                                                                                                                 NEUTRAL CITATION




                            C/SCA/724/2023                                      ORDER DATED: 13/11/2025

                                                                                                                  undefined




                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                                    R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 724 of 2023

                     ==========================================================
                                              PATEL ANILKUMAR AMRUTBHAI
                                                         Versus
                                               STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
                     ==========================================================
                     Appearance:
                     MR BHAVESH J PATEL(6801) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
                     ADITYA DAVDA AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
                     ==========================================================

                       CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI

                                                        Date : 13/11/2025

                                                          ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Bhavesh Patel for the petitioner, Learned AGP Aditya Pathak for the State. With the consent of the parties the matter was taken up for final hearing. Hence, Rule. Learned AGP waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent-State.

2. By way of this petition the petitioner has prayed following prayer;

" YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to admit and allow this petition.
YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions be issued to quash and set aside the action of the respondent in refusing to give the petitioners continuity of service from Page 1 of 6 Uploaded by BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 19 22:44:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/724/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/11/2025 undefined the date of appointment and the petitioner shall be treated to be in continuous service from the date of his initial appointment and his seniority may accordingly be granted in the interest of justice;
YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions directing the respondent authorities, the termination period from 01/11/2020 to 04/01/2021 shall not be treated as break for all purpose in the interest of justice.
Any other and further relief or reliefs to which this Hon'ble court deemed fit, in the interest of justice; may be granted."

3. Brief facts of the petition are as under; 3.1. That the petitioner was appointed as "Beat Guard" vide order dated 31.08.2013 on contractual basis for a period of 5 years and on completion of 5 years, he was supposed to be placed in the regular scale. Accordingly, on 1st of November 2018, upon completion of 5 years, the petitioner was placed in the regular scale vide order dated 03.05.2019. As per condition No. 3 of the said order, the petitioner was put into the regular scale with retrospective effect from 1st November 2018, as the petitioner's contractual period of 5 years had ended on 31st October 2018. As per clause No. 5 of the order, whereby the petitioner was placed in the regular pay scale, the petitioner Page 2 of 6 Uploaded by BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 19 22:44:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/724/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/11/2025 undefined was required to pass the CCC examination from a government- recognized institution within the stipulated time. Though it is not stated in the order, according to learned Advocate Mr. Bhavesh Patel, the aforesaid period within which the petitioner was required to pass the CCC examination was 2 years, and therefore, the outer limit to pass the CCC examination was 31st October 2020.

3.2. As the petitioner could not pass the examination, though he appeared in the CCC examination conducted by SPIPA on 16.10.2020, and as the result could not be declared before 31st October 2020, the petitioner's services were terminated. However, upon declaration of the result on 31st December 2020, the petitioner was reappointed vide order dated 04.01.2021. However, the petitioner was not granted the benefit of continuous service and therefore, the petitioner has, by way of this petition, challenged the order dated 4th January 2021, whereby though the petitioner was reinstated in service, the benefit of continuity was not granted to the petitioner.

4. Learned Advocate Mr. Bhavesh Patel relied upon the decision dated 16.09.2022 of the coordinate bench of this Court in R/Special Civil Application No.11860 of 2022, in the Page 3 of 6 Uploaded by BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 19 22:44:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/724/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/11/2025 undefined case of Parmar Pravinkumar Laxmanbhai vs. State of Gujarat , wherein as the examination could not be taken up in time and therefore there was delay in publication of the result, and as the petitioner had passed the examination, the petitioner was granted the benefit of continuity of service and the period for which the petitioner's services were terminated was directed not to be treated as break for any purpose.

4.1. Learned Advocate Mr. Patel, therefore, by relying upon the said judgment, prayed for allowing the petition by passing an order directing the respondents to treat the services of the petitioner as continuous service without considering the period between 29.10.2020 to 4th January 2020 to be a period of break, and to treat the service of the petitioner as continuous service for all purposes.

5. Learned AGP Mr. Davda, despite making his best efforts, submitted that as the petitioner could not clear the CCC examination in time, his services were rightly terminated and as per the order regularizing the petitioner himself, in case the petitioner failed to clear the CCC examination within a period of 2 years, his services could be terminated, and upon clearing the examination, he could be reinstated, but as a fresh appointee, and the benefit of continuity was not provided as Page 4 of 6 Uploaded by BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 19 22:44:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/724/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/11/2025 undefined per the rules themselves. However, learned AGP Mr. Davda could not dispute the fact that the decision of the coordinate bench is on the very point, nor could he point out any contrary decision. However, he prayed for dismissal of the petition.

6. I have heard Learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record.

7. On perusal of the record, I found that the petitioner was supposed to clear the CCC examination from a valid recognized institution on or before 31st October 2020. Though the petitioner appeared in the examination on 16th October 2020, the result could not be published before the deadline, i.e., 31st October 2020, and the result was published only on 31st December 2020. In the meantime, vide impugned order dated 29th October 2020, the petitioner's services were terminated, which was later followed by a fresh appointment vide order dated 4th January 2021, whereby the petitioner was reinstated in service.

8. Considering the fact that in the decision dated 16.09.2022, the coordinate bench of this Court, in similar circumstances, directed the State that as the petitioner had Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 19 22:44:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/724/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/11/2025 undefined appeared in the CCC examination well within the prescribed time and had cleared the CCC examination from a recognized institution, merely because the result was published late, the same could not come in the way of the petitioner, and accordingly directed the respondents not to treat the interregnum period as break in service, a similar view is required to be taken in the present matter as well. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed not to treat the period between 29th October 2020 and 4th January 2021 as break in service and to treat the same as continuous service.

9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute. No order as to costs. Direct service is permitted.

(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J) BHAVIN MEHTA Page 6 of 6 Uploaded by BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 19 22:44:16 IST 2025