Gujarat High Court
Mitaliben Narottambhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 4 July, 2022
Bench: Biren Vaishnav
C/SCA/629/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/07/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 629 of 2019
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 ?
==========================================================
MITALIBEN NAROTTAMBHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RUTVIJ M BHATT(2697) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
MR.KURVEN DESAI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Respondent(s) No. 5
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Respondent(s) No. 4
MR JEET J BHATT(6154) for the Respondent(s) No. 5
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
Date : 04/07/2022
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. RULE returnable forthwith. Mr.Kurven Desai learned
AGP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the
respondent Nos.1 and 2, Mr.H.S.Munshaw learned
advocate waives service of Rule on behalf of
C/SCA/629/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/07/2022
respondent nos.3 and 4 and Mr.Jeet Bhatt learned
advocate waives service of Rule on behalf of
respondent no.5.
2. With the consent of learned advocates for the
respective parties, the petition is taken up for final
hearing.
3. Apprehending that her appointment to the selection in
the post of Aanganvadi Worker at Patel Fadia, at
Village:Rumla, shall be cancelled and her services be
terminated, the petitioner approached this Court by
filing the present petition.
4. Mr.Rutvij Bhatt learned counsel for the petitioner
would submit that as per the advertisement for the
post of Aanganvadi worker issued in the year 2018,
the petitioner applied for the post since she was
residing at Patel Fadia, at Village:Rumla. She was
meritorious and therefore an appointment order was
issued on 01.10.2018. Pleadings in the petition would
suggest that it is the case of the petitioner that after
she resumed her duties, she came to know that one
C/SCA/629/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/07/2022
candidate viz. Tinaben Sumanbhai Ganvit -
respondent no.5, has lodged an objection against the
appointment of the petitioner and she claims her right
as a beneficiary of the said post. She made a detailed
representation to the respondent nos.2 and 3
clarifying that the objection was misconceived.
5. Mr.Jeet Bhatt learned counsel appearing for the
respondent no.5 - Tinaben Ganvit, submits that in
accordance with the policy for appointment of
Aanganvadi workers, a habitant of village, more
particularly of the area within which the
advertisement is given, is eligible to be appointed and
the petitioner is not so qualified. To this, Mr.Bhatt
would submit that the application was made by the
petitioner pursuant to the advertisement for Patel
Fadia, at Village:Rumla, where the petitioner was
residing, whereas the respondent no.5 was residing at
Kanbi Vad, which would not come within the vicinity
and within the purview of the advertisement.
6. Apparently, no decision was taken on the objections
C/SCA/629/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/07/2022
lodged by the respondent no.5 and according to
Mr.Munshaw, the petition at this stage is premature.
7. Obviously therefore considering the averments in the
petition, no order of terminating the services has been
passed or a decision taken based on the objections
which the respondent no.5 would have lodged with
the respondent nos.3 and 4. On 16.01.2019, this
Court while issuing notice, has passed the following
order:
"Heard learned advocate Mr. Rutvij Bhatt for the
petitioner.
The petitioner is appointed as Anganwadi
Worker at Patel Fadia, village: Rumla, Tal:
Chikhli, Dist: Navsari pursuant to the
process undertaken and having been
selected on merit. The petitioner
apprehends that upon the objection lodged by
the private respondent No.5 herein, the
authorities may undo the appointment of the
petitioner.
Notice returnable on 06.02.2019.
As the factum of the appointment of the
petitioner is shown on the post of Anganwadi
Worker, it is directed by way of adinterim relief,
there shall be no termination of the
petitioner till the next date of hearing.
Direct service is permitted."
C/SCA/629/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/07/2022
8. The respondent nos.3 and 4 shall consider the
objections, if any, raised by the respondent no.5. At
the time when the objections of the respondent no.5
are considered, an opportunity of hearing shall be
given to the petitioner to remain present and contest
the same and no orders be made without hearing the
petitioner.
9. The interim order against the termination of the
petitioner is operating since 16.01.2019 and an
appropriate decision on objection, if any, shall be
taken by the respondent nos.3 and 4 within a period
of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this
order.
10. In the event the objections are upheld and the
petitioner is sought to be dislodged, the order shall
not operate for a period of two weeks from the date it
is communicated.
11. The petition is disposed of in the above terms. Direct
service is permitted.
(BIREN VAISHNAV, J)
ANKIT SHAH
