Patel Amitaben Devchandbhai vs State Of Gujarat
2022 Latest Caselaw 6070 Guj

     C/SCA/3250/2019                               JUDGMENT DATED: 07/07/2022



             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3250 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 ?

==========================================================
                        PATEL AMITABEN DEVCHANDBHAI
                                    Versus
                              STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR GAURAV CHUDASAMA(5660) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR.SOAHAM JOSHI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================

    CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV

                               Date : 07/07/2022

                               ORAL JUDGMENT

1. RULE returnable forthwith. Mr.Soaham Joshi

learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule on

behalf of the respondent State.

C/SCA/3250/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/07/2022

2. With the consent of learned advocates for the

respective parties, the petition is taken up for final

hearing.

3. It appears that from the prayers made in this

petition that the issue involved in this petition is now

covered by the decision of this Court rendered in

Special Civil Application No.999 of 2019 vide order

dated 04.07.2022. The said order reads as under:

"1 Heard Mr.Gaurav Chudasma, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.Kurven Desai, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondents Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr.Manish J. Patel, learned advocate for respondent No.3.

2 Mr.Gaurav Chudasma, learned counsel for the petitioners, seeks permission to withdraw the petition qua petitioner No.2 only. The petition stands abated qua petitioner No.2.

3 The sole petitioner No.1 has prayed for a relief that the respondents Nos. 2 and 3 be directed to not to declare the petitioner, surplus teacher from Balisana Primary School and if a camp is to be held for transfer to upper primary section, then the set up of 31.08.2017 be considered.

3.1 The short submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that for no fault of the petitioner, the camp, which was scheduled to be held on 30.04.2018, as per the communication dated 19.04.2018 was not held.

But for the omission to held such camp, the

C/SCA/3250/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/07/2022

petitioner would not have been transferred from Talod to Idar. In the event, the camp is now held, the petitioner would suffer, inasmuch as, she would be liable to be transferred on the basis of transfer from Talod to Idar.

4 Mr.Manish Patel, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3, District Primary Education Officer, Sabarkantha, would rely on a communication dated 18.02.2019 which indicates that once the camp has been cancelled for the year 2018, the camp in the year 2019 in accordance with the policy has to be held as per the set up of 31.08.2018.

5 Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, what is evident is that once the camp was cancelled by the communication dated 19.04.2018, which was scheduled to be held on 30.04.2018, the right of the petitioner is to be considered on the basis of the set up of as on 31.08.2017 got distinguished in absence of any challenge to the authorities not holding the camp. Based on a transfer and consideration of a case of the petitioner as stipulated in the communication dated 18.02.2019 which indicates that the set up of 31.08.2018 has to be seen, cannot be faulted. The petition is dismissed, accordingly."

4. Present matter will also be governed by the above

quoted order.

5. The petition is dismissed accordingly. Rule is

discharged.

(BIREN VAISHNAV, J) ANKIT SHAH