Gujarat High Court
Priyank Sarmanbhai Mushar vs State Of Gujarat on 12 January, 2023
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
C/SCA/23755/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/01/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 23755 of 2022
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 24247 of 2022
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 24917 of 2022
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 25006 of 2022
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 25007 of 2022
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 25697 of 2022
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20745 of 2022
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20846 of 2022
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20876 of 2022
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE Sd/-
================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed NO
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy NO
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question NO
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
================================================================
PRIYANK SARMANBHAI MUSHAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Page 1 of 5
Downloaded on : Thu Jan 19 20:30:59 IST 2023
C/SCA/23755/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/01/2023
================================================================
Appearance:
MR AJAY R.MEHTA for MS. NIYATI V VAISHNAV(6168) for the Petitioner(s)
No. 1
MR JAY MEHTA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
Date : 12/01/2023
COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP Mr.Jay Mehta
waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the
respondent - State.
2. This group of petitions raises identical issues based on
similar facts, therefore, at the request of all, they are taken up
for joint hearing and disposal.
3. Heard Mr.Ajay R.Mehta, learned advocate with Ms.Niyati
Vaishnav, learned advocate for the petitioners and Mr.Jay
Mehta, learned AGP for the respondent - State.
4. The petitioners belong to the communities which are
covered under the Scheduled Tribes category. The Gujarat Public
Service Commission, the Gujarat Subordinate Service Selection
Board as well as the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation
issued different advertisements bearing Nos.167-180/2018-19;
189/2020-21; 26/2020-21; 05/2021-22; 14/2021-22;
15/2021-22; 26/2020-21 dated 7.3.2021, 20.1.2021,
C/SCA/23755/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/01/2023
10.11.2020, 6.1.2022, 28.3.2022, 28.3.2022, 10.11.2020
respectively for filling up vacancies in Class-I, Class-II and
Class-III posts in different departments.
5. The petitioners submitted their application and appeared
for the written examination. The petitioners were found eligible
to be appointed to the respective posts and their names figured
in the select list. However, no appointment orders have been
issued to the petitioners because of their caste certificate
controversy pending consideration before the Scrutiny
Committee.
6. Mr.Ajay R.Mehta, learned advocate appearing for the
petitioners would submit that the scrutiny for examining the
petitioners' caste certificate is pending since long and though the
petitioners have been selected for appointment to the respective
posts but for the exercise at the hands of the Scrutiny
Committee, which is pending, no appointment orders are being
issued. He would rely on the order passed by this Court in the
Special Civil Application No.1858 of 2021.
7. Mr.Jay Mehta, learned AGP would rely on one affidavit-in-
reply filed in the SCA No.1171 of 2022. On perusing the same, it
would indicate that due to certain protests and agitations, and
by virtue of pendency of the issue, the caste certificates have not
been given to the 'Rabari', 'Bharvad' and 'Charan' communities
living in the ness areas in the forests of Alech, Gir and Barda of
Gujarat. Since the petitioners belong to these areas and the
C/SCA/23755/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/01/2023
issue pertains to the veracity of the caste of the petitioners who
belong to these areas, the caste certificates have not been issued
for the time being till the Committee takes a decision.
8. Considering the order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of
this Court dated 26.07.2021, the respondent authorities are
hereby directed to give provisional appointment to the petitioners
to the respective posts, subject to the result of the Scrutiny
Committee. Such order shall be issued within a period of two
months from the date of receipt of copy of writ of this order.
9. It is, however, clarified that the appointment of the
petitioners would be provisional, and in case, it is found by the
Scrutiny Committee that the certificate of the petitioners is not
genuine, the petitioners will not be entitled to any benefit of the
provisional service. It is also clarified that if the caste certificate
of the petitioners is found to be genuine, it will be open for the
petitioners to claim their actual appointment from the date of
their juniors and also continuity of service and other benefits.
10. As the appointment is being given provisionally subject to
the decision of the Scrutiny Committee regarding the caste
certificate, which is under scrutiny, the provisional appointment
shall stand automatically terminated if the Scrutiny Committee
comes to the conclusion that the certificate is not a genuine
certificate. It will not be open then for the department to extend
such provisional appointment under the guise that the decision
of the Scrutiny Committee is open for challenge before the
appropriate forum or this Court.
C/SCA/23755/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/01/2023
11. The petitions are allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule
made absolute accordingly. Direct service is permitted.
(A.Y. KOGJE, J.)
/MOINUDDIN
