Gujarat High Court
Kalpeshkumar Prahladji Vihol vs Gujarat Subordinate Services ... on 6 October, 2023
Bench: Aniruddha P. Mayee
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/8294/2022 ORDER DATED: 06/10/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8294 of 2022
==========================================================
KALPESHKUMAR PRAHLADJI VIHOL
Versus
GUJARAT SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD THROUGH
SECRETARY & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PRATIK Y JASANI(5325) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 06/10/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. The present Special Civil Application has been filed praying for
the following reliefs :-
"(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to issue appropriate
writ, order and/or direction, quashing and setting aside
the impugned communication dated 31.03.2022 issued
by Respondent No.2 (Annexure A), in the interest of
justice;
(B) Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal
of this petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to issue
appropriate directions to the Respondent authorities to
select and appoint the petitioner on the post of Sanitary
Inspector Class III on the basis of seniority position of
the petitioner in the waiting List prepared by the
Respondents for recruitment of Sanitary Inspector Class
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/8294/2022 ORDER DATED: 06/10/2023
undefined
III pursuant to Advertisement published by the
Respondent no. bearing No.102/2016-17, on such terms
and conditions as may be deemed fit, just and proper by
this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice;
(C) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to grant such other
and further reliefs in favour of the petitioner, as deemed
fit, just and proper in the interest of justice."
2. The brief facts in the present case are as follows :-
2.1 That, the petitioner applied for the post of Municipal Sanitary
Inspector (Class-III) pursuant to the advertisement dated 26.01.2017
issued by the respondent No.1 Gujarat Subordinate Services
Selection Board. It is the case of the petitioner that he was found to
be eligible and was called for the next stage i. e. verification of the
documents on 19.10.2019, and accordingly, the petitioner appeared
before the authority and verified his documents. That, thereafter,
the results came to be declared by the respondent No.1 Board on
25.10.2019. As per the said advertisement, 63 posts of Sanitary
Inspector (Class-III) were to be filled up and accordingly, the
respondent No.1 published the select list of 63 candidates. The
petitioner herein could not make into the select list of 63
candidates, but was placed at serial No.8 in the waiting list, which
was intimated to the petitioner by communication dated
04.11.2019.
2.2 It is the case of the petitioner that out of 63 candidates who
were selected, some of them did not join the service and some other
left the service after joining the same and therefore, the vacancy
had arisen. It is further submitted that the respondent No.1 Board
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/8294/2022 ORDER DATED: 06/10/2023
undefined
operated the waiting list and absorbed first three candidates from
the waiting list. It is the case of the petitioner that there were five
vacancies available and the petitioner was in the zone for being
appointed to the post of Sanitary Inspector (Class-III). The petitioner
made several representations for operation of the waiting list, but
did not get any response to the same. By communication dated
22.03.2022, the respondent No.2 herein indicated about the
vacancy position for the post of Sanitary Inspector (Class-III) as well
as the position of the waiting list. That, thereafter, by impugned
communication dated 31.03.2022, the respondent No.2 intimated
the petitioner that the tenure of the waiting list was for two years
and since the said period was over, no further action can be taken.
2.3 Aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred the present Special
Civil Application.
3. Shri Pratik Jasani, the learned advocate appearing for the
petitioner submits that despite the vacancies being available and
the petitioner being in the zone of consideration for selection, no
steps were taken by the respondent authorities to fill up the said
vacant post through operation of the waiting list. He submits that
being in the waiting list, the petitioner had a right to be appointed to
the post of Sanitary Inspector (Class-III) and that the respondents
could not have refused to operate the said waiting list which was
prepared by them, within a period of two years. He submits that no
explanation has been forthcoming as to why the waiting list was not
operated and the vacant posts were not filled up. He further submits
that the respondents may be directed to fill up the vacant post of
Sanitary Inspector (Class-III) by giving appointment to the petitioner
since he was eligible to be appointed being in the waiting list.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/8294/2022 ORDER DATED: 06/10/2023
undefined
4. Per contra, Ms. Hetal Patel, the learned AGP submits that by
impugned communication dated 31.03.2022, the petitioner has
been intimated by the respondent No.1 Board that as per the rules,
the waiting list has to be operated within a period of two years and
since the said period has expired, no further action can be taken on
the said waiting list and the petitioner cannot be appointed from the
said waiting list. She submits that as per the rules, the said waiting
list can be operated within two years and thereafter, if any posts are
left out, the same have to be filled up by fresh selection process.
She, therefore, submits that any direction passed by this Court will
be contrary to the rules prescribed. She submits that the present
Special Civil Application be dismissed.
5. Heard the learned advocates for the parties and perused the
documents on record.
6. It is not in dispute in the present case that the waiting list,
which is prepared by the respondent No.1 Gujarat Subordinate
Services Selection Board, has to be operated within a period of two
years as per the rules. In the present case, the select list and the
waiting list were declared on 25.10.2019. The petitioner was shown
at serial No.8 in the waiting list. The said list was in operation till
24.10.2021. Thereafter, the said waiting list could not be operated
by the State Government in view of the rules prescribed, though
there are vacancies as contended by the learned advocate for the
petitioner. In the present case, it may also be noticed that the
waiting list expired on 24.10.2021 and the petitioner has
approached this Court on 19.04.2022 long after expiry of the waiting
list as prescribed under the rules. Further, the averments in the writ
petition show that the petitioner has vaguely stated as to how he
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/8294/2022 ORDER DATED: 06/10/2023
undefined
becomes eligible for appointment to a vacant post though he is
placed at serial No.8 without furnishing any particulars or
substantiating the same by way of any documents. The learned
advocate for the petitioner has relied upon the judgments reported
in 1994 Supp(2) SCC 591 and 2005(2) GLR 1274 in support of his
contentions, however none of the aforesaid judgments lays down
any ratio that the Court can grant a positive direction for
appointment of a candidate, if the waiting list was expired under the
prescribed rules and therefore, these judgments will not be of any
help to the petitioner.
7. In view of aforesaid, no relief can be granted to the petitioner
since the waiting list has expired under the prescribed rules. The
Special Civil Application is devoid of merits. The same is accordingly
dismissed. Notice is discharged. No order as to costs.
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
cmk
