Sanjaysinh Ranjitsinh Ataliya vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 777 Guj

     C/SCA/1148/2023                              JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2023




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD


               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1148 of 2023


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 ?

================================================================
                       SANJAYSINH RANJITSINH ATALIYA
                                  Versus
                            STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
MS HARSHAL N PANDYA(3141) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,10,11,12,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
 for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4
MR. JAY MEHTA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================

    CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE

                              Date : 31/01/2023

                             ORAL JUDGMENT

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed seeking direction to set-aside the advertisement dated

C/SCA/1148/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2023

15th October 2022 issued by the respondent no.4 - Karjan Municipality.

2. The basis of challenge is the claim of the petitioners who are already working with the respondent no.4 - Municipality since long and, therefore, their claim for being regularized/appointed be considered first before embarking upon the recruitment process.

3. Learned advocate for the petitioners submitted that it is the policy decision of the State Government itself under Circular dated 14th July 2022, wherein it has been mentioned that priority is required to be given to the employees who are already working with the Municipalities.

4. It is apparent from the record that in response to the advertisement at Annexure-A dated 15th October 2022 for various posts in the Karjan Municipality, the petitioners, who claim to be working on different posts with the respondent - Municipality, had also applied. Therefore, the petitioners have participated in the recruitment process pursuant to the advertisement.

5. From the pleadings as well as the documents on record, the Court does not find any cause of action as the recruitment process is only to begin pursuant to the advertisement. The petitioners are the applicants and they would be facing the recruitment process. Therefore, a stage has not arrived where the question of giving priority to the petitioners over other applicants would arise.

C/SCA/1148/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2023

6. In that view of the matter, in the opinion of the Court, for lack of any cause of action, the petition is a premature one. The claim of the petitioners is for getting priority as per the policy of the Government. Needless to mention that in the recruitment process the process is accepted only when the same is in conformity with the policy of the State Government, including the policy which is floated under the Circular dated 14 th July 2022, specifically clause (2) of such Circular, under which the petitioners are claiming priority.

7. There is no reason for this Court to believe that the recruitment process will proceed dehors such policy of the State Government.

8. With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of.

(A.Y. KOGJE, J.) /MOINUDDIN