Gujarat High Court
Goswami Jayeshbharti ... vs State Of Gujarat on 7 February, 2022
Bench: Biren Vaishnav
C/SCA/16488/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16488 of 2020
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR DIRECTION) NO. 1 of 2021
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16488 of 2020
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
GOSWAMI JAYESHBHARTI RAMESHBHARTI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.SUDHIR NANAVATI, LD. SENIOR ADVOCATE for MR VANDAN K
BAXI(5863) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,2,20,21,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
MS PRACHITI V SHAH(9990) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,2,20,21,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
NANAVATI & NANAVATI(1933) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,2,20,21,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
MR.KURVEN DESAI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Respondent(s) No.
10,11,12,13,18,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Respondent(s) No. 15,17,19
MR MP PRAJAPATI(677) for the Respondent(s) No. 17
MR PRADIP J PATEL(5896) for the Respondent(s) No. 14,20
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
Date : 07/02/2022
Page 1 of 4
Downloaded on : Mon Feb 07 20:54:38 IST 2022
C/SCA/16488/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2022
COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Civil Application is disposed of and the main matter
is being taken up for final hearing today.
2. RULE returnable forthwith. With the consent of the
learned advocates for the respective parties, the
petition is taken up for final hearing.
3. Heard Mr.Sudhir Nanavai learned Senior Advocate
for Mr.Vandan Baxi learned advocate for the
petitioner and learned AGP, Mr.H.S.Munshaw
learned advocate and Mr.Pradip Patel for the
respective respondents.
4. It is undisputed that the petition was tagged and was
to be heard with the group of matters, lead matter
being Special Civil Application No.3255 of 2019 and
others decided by this Court (Coram:Mr.Justice
Bhargav D. Karia) dated 25.08.2021. However, the
same has been left out.
5. The relevant paragraphs of the above said order
read as under:
"19. In view of the above Rules which are
relevant for deciding the controversy arising in
these petitions, in facts of the cases of
individual petitioners, they were transferred
from their respective school either on the
ground that the petitioners were declared as
surplus pursuant to the aforesaid resolutions or
C/SCA/16488/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2022
in some cases as option was exercised by the
concerned petitioner.
20. The petitioners were considered as surplus
teachers considering their appointment in
upper primary section of standard 6 to 8 in the
seniority list maintained by the respective
schools considering the date of entry in upper
primary section.
21. Thus the seniority list of standard 1 to 5
and that of standard 6 to 8 was prepared on the
basis of Government Resolution dated
26.10.2020 without considering the Rule 3 of
Chapter-Kh(B) of Government Resolution dated
23.5.2012 which stipulates that for the purpose
of declaring surplus teacher, date of
appointment in particular school is required to
be considered. Therefore, the date of
appointment of the petitioners in the respective
schools is required to be considered and not
the date when the petitioners were allotted
teaching work in upper primary section of
standard 6 to 8.
22. Thus the respondents have committed an
error in preparing the seniority list for
standard 1 to 5 and that for standard 6 to 8 as
per Government Resolution dated 26.10.2020
which cannot be permitted in view of Rule 3 of
Chapter Kh(B) of the Government Resolution
dated 23.5.2012.
23. In that view of the matter, the petitioners
who have been transferred by impugned
transfer orders, which order is not yet
implemented due to pendency of these
petitions, cannot be sustained and are hereby
quashed and set aside. The petitioners are
required to be considered in seniority list for
standard 6 to 8 as per their date of
appointment in the respective schools and
C/SCA/16488/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2022
therefore, in the next camp, respective schools
are required to consider the status of the
petitioners accordingly and declare the
petitioners as surplus or otherwise after
considering the seniority of the petitioners with
effect from the date of their respective
appointments in the said school.
24. In view of above, all the petitions are
disposed of. The respondents are directed to
consider the status of the petitioners afresh for
the transfer camp to be held in the month of
October or November 2021 irrespective of
declaring the petitioners as surplus in the year
2020.
25. The respondents authorities are also
directed to hold the option camp prior to
holding of surplus camp of the teachers/Vidhya
Sahayaks so as to see that once the teachers
who have given option are transferred then
only the surplus camps be organised so that the
teachers who are declared surplus by the
respective schools can be considered after the
vacant places are filled in by the teachers who
have given option and are eligible for transfer
as per the option in view of the rules framed in
the aforesaid Government Resolutions."
6. The above referred order shall govern the case of
the present petitioner.
7. The petition is disposed of in the above terms. Rule
is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(BIREN VAISHNAV, J)
ANKIT SHAH
