Niravkumar Shivabhai Chaudhari vs State Of Gujarat
2021 Latest Caselaw 7971 Guj

     C/SCA/18914/2017                            ORDER DATED: 07/07/2021




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
             R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 18914 of 2017
==========================================================
                    NIRAVKUMAR SHIVABHAI CHAUDHARI
                                 Versus
                       STATE OF GUJARAT & 3 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ANAND L SHARMA(1714) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR. K.M. ANTANI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR PREMAL R JOSHI(1327) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
NOTICE SERVED BY DS(5) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,3,4
==========================================================
 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA

                             Date : 07/07/2021

                              ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Anand Sharma for the petitioner,

learned advocate Mr. Premal Joshi for the respondent No.2 and

learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. K.M. Antani for the

respondent­State through video conference.

2. Learned advocate Mr. Anand Sharma for the petitioner has

submitted that the petitioner applied for the post of Deputy Section

Officer/ Deputy Mamlatdar in the reserved category. In the

selection process conducted by the Gujarat Public Service

Commission, the petitioner secured 171 marks in the main

examination which is more than the cut off marks of the candidates

selected in the general category. The petitioner could not submit

the Non­Creamy Layer certificate within time prescribed by the

C/SCA/18914/2017 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2021

Gujarat Public Service Commission. It is, therefore, submitted that

case of the petitioner ought to have been considered in the general

category and petitioner is required to be appointed considering him

selected in general category as the petitioner did not avail any

benefit of reserved category except reduction in fees.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi for the respondent No.2 states

that such plea of the petitioner cannot be accepted in view of the

various Supreme Court and High Court judgments and prays for

some time to place on the record such judgments to the effect that

once a person of reserved category fails to comply with the

requirement of getting selection under the reserved category, he

cannot be considered in general category though he is meritorious

than the other general category candidates.

4. At the request of learned advocate Mr. Joshi to substantiate

above submission by relying upon the various judgments so as to

place such judgments on record for consideration of the Court,

stand over to 14.07.2021.

5. To be listed on top of the Board.

(BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) SUYASH