Gujarat High Court
Kaizad Mehernosh Dastoor vs Chairman, Gujarat Public Service ... on 21 April, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia, Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/552/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 552 of 2025
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3715 of 2025
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025
In
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 552 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA Sd/-
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Sd/-
=============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
√
=============================================
KAIZAD MEHERNOSH DASTOOR
Versus
CHAIRMAN, GUJARAT PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ANR.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR G.M. JOSHI, SENIOR ADVOCATE with
MR BOMI H SETHNA(5864) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR MANAN MAHETA(6037) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR NIKUNT K RAVAL(5558) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 21/04/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. ADMIT. Learned advocates appearing on behalf of the
respondents waive service of notice of admission on
behalf of their respective respondents.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/552/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
2. The present Letters Patent Appeal filed under Clause 15
of the Letters Patent, 1865, is directed against the
judgment and order dated 27.03.2025 passed by the
learned Single Judge rejecting the captioned writ petition
filed by the appellant-original petitioner, challenging the
action of the respondent No.1 of disqualifying him from
further participating in the process of recruitment to the
post of Chief Fire Officer, Class-I, Gandhinagar Municipal
Corporation (GMC) i.e. the respondent No.2.
BRIEF FACTS : -
3. Pursuant to the advertisement no.10/2024-25 issued in
the month of July, 2024, the appellant applied for the
post of Chief Fire Officer in Respondent no.2-Gandhinagar
Municipal Corporation. After necessary scrutiny of the
applications filed by the candidates, the Respondent no.2
published a notice dated 06.03.2025 on its website,
wherein the appellant has been shown as ineligible for
want of requisite experience. After his representation was
rejected by the respondent no.2 on 26.03.2025, the
appellant filed the captioned writ petition assailing the
decision of his rejection of candidature. The learned
Single Judge has rejected the writ petition, which has
given rise to the present appeal.
4. The appellant is disqualified for further participation in
the recruitment process only for want of experience, as
required under Rule 3(c) read with Rules 3(b)(i) of the
Chief Fire Officer, Class-I, in the Gandhinagar Municipal
Corporation Recruitment Rules, 2024 (for short, "the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/552/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
Chief Fire Officer Rules, 2024").
5. The learned Single Judge has held that the appellant does
not fulfill the criteria of experience of 7 years, as required
in the aforementioned Chief Fire Officer Rules, 2024 and
thus, has rejected the writ petition.
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT : -
6. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. G. M. Joshi, appearing with
learned advocate Mr.Bomi H. Sethna, for the appellant -
original petitioner, at the outset, has referred to the
experience gained by the present appellant in various
establishments and has submitted that the appellant is
fulfilling the criteria the seven years' experience, and in
fact, he is having more than seven years of experience.
7. He has further referred to the experience, as recorded by
the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgement.
However, he has candidly admitted that so far as the
experience gained by the appellant, as recorded by the
learned Single Judge in the paragraph No.4.4 of the
judgment of Fire Officer is incorrect and the same would
be 9 months instead of 2 years, 10 months and 15 days,
since the appellant has procured the Sub-Officer
Certificate on 11.05.2015 and from 11.05.2015 to
15.02.2016, the period comes to 9 months. It is
submitted that the total period of experience would come
to 8 years and 6 months, which is beyond the experience
of 7 years.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/552/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
8. While referring to the provisions of Clause (c) of Rule 3 of
the Chief Fire Officer Rules, 2024, it is submitted by the
learned Senior Advocate Mr.Joshi that seven years'
experience is bifurcated in two parts; i.e., three years'
experience on the post, which is equivalent to the post,
not below rank of Station Officer or Assistant Divisional
Officer and the remaining four years in Fire Brigade. It is
submitted that the appellant's experience, after the field
of the completion of Divisional Fire Officer course, i.e. 6
years 9 months and 10 days, has to be added to the
prior experience of one year nine months in view of the
language of the Rules. It is submitted that the deficit
period can be borrowed from the experience rendered
prior to the acquiring of the qualification. It is contended
that reliance placed by the learned Single Judge on the
judgments cited by the other side was misplaced since
the judgments do not deal with the similar provision to
that of Rule 3(c), which refers to the experience of two
different categories. Thus, it is urged that the judgment
and order passed by the learned Single Judge may be
quashed and set aside.
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS :-
9. Per contra, learned advocate Mr.Manan Mehta, appearing
for the respondent No.1 - Gujarat Public Service
Commission (the GPSC) has submitted that as per the
provisions of sub-clause (i) of Rule 3(b) of the Chief Fire
Officer Rules, 2024, the experience rendered after
completion of the Divisional Officer Course can only be
considered as per the Clause (c) of Rule 3 of the Chief
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/552/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
Fire Officer Rules, 2024. It is submitted that if such
experience is considered, then the appellant is not
satisfying the same. He has referred to the appellant's
representation dated 07.03.2025 and has submitted that
the appellant himself has admitted that he is only having
6 years 9 months and 10 days, and hence the experience
gained prior to that cannot be counted for the purpose of
satisfying the requirement of the Clause (c) of Rule 3 of
the Chief Fire Officer Rules, 2024. He has also pointed out
the General Instructions No.6(2)(a) of the Advertisement,
which clarifies that the experience, which is gained after
obtaining the requisite qualification can only be
considered.
10. Learned advocate Mr.Mehta, has also referred to the
communication dated 26.03.2025 written by the Joint
Secretary of the respondent No.1 informing the appellant
that as per the provisions of Rule 8(8)(a) of the Gujarat
Civil Services Classification and Recruitment (General)
Rules, 1967, (in short, the "Rules, 1967"), the experience
of a candidate, which he has gained after the acquisition
of the requisite educational qualification can only be
considered, and not prior to obtaining the education
qualification. He has further referred to the observations
recorded by the learned Single Judge and has submitted
that the learned Single Judge, while placing reliance on
the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the
case of K.V. Garasiya Vs. Babubhai N. Gavit, 1991 (1) GLR
229 and the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of
Indian Airlines Ltd. and Ors. Vs. S. Gopalakrishnan,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/552/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
(2001) 2 SCC 362, has precisely rejected the writ petition.
He has submitted that on an analogous issue, the
Division Bench in the case of K.V. Garasiya (supra),
while examining the provisions of Rules 3, 8(8)(a) of the
Rules, 1967, has held that the experience, which is
gained after obtaining the requisite qualification can only
be considered for the purpose of satisfying the
requirement of recruitment rules and not prior thereto. It
is thus submitted that whatever the experience, which
the appellant has been gained, prior to completion of the
Divisional Officer Course, cannot be considered for
counting the total 7 years experience.
11. Learned Advocate Mr.Nikunt K. Raval, appearing for the
respondent No.2 has adopted the arguments as
advanced by the learned advocate Mr.Manan Mehta,
appearing for the respondent No.1 and has supported the
judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge.
OPINION AND CONCLUSION : -
12. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties. We have also perused the judgment
and order passed by the learned Single Judge.
13. So far as the experience gained by the appellant is
concerned, the same is not in dispute and is incorporated
as under : -
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/552/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
EXPERIENCE -
Sr. Name of Post Period Type Experience
No Institution
1. Vinod Fire 11.05.2015 Private 9 months
Fabrics Pvt. Officer To Fire
Ltd. 15.02.2016 Brigade
2. Arvind Fire 20.02.2016 Private 1 Year
Limited Officer To Fire
19.02.2017 Brigade
3. Junagadh Fire 07.10.2017 Govt. 1 Year,
Municipal Officer To Fire 8 Months, 2
Corporation 09.06.2019 Brigade Days
4. Ahmedabad Sahayak 10.06.2019 Govt. 1 Year,
Municipal Station To Fire 7 Months, 8
Corporation Fire 18.01.2021 Brigade Days
Officer
5. Ahmedabad Divisional 19.01.2021 Govt. 3 Years,
Municipal Fire To Fire 6 Months,
Corporation Officer 18.07.2024 Brigade 25 Days
Total Experience 8 Years,
7 Months 11
days
14. The case of the respective parties entirely hinges on
below mentioned provisions of law.
a) General Instructions No.6(2)(a) of the Advertisement,
the same read as under:
6: Experience:
(1)The requisite experience will be counted from the last
date of receipt of the application;
(2)Unless otherwise provided in the advertisement, the
experience shall be counted from the date, of acquiring
the requisite educational qualification.
b) Rule 3(b)(i) and Clause (c) of the Chief Fire Officer
Rules, 2024, read as under : -
"3. To be eligible for appointment by direct selection to
the post mentioned in; rule-2, a candidate shall-
(a) not be more than 45 years of age,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/552/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
Provided that the upper age limit may be relaxed in
favour of a candidate belonging to Scheduled Castes or
Scheduled Tribes or Socially and Educationally Backward
Classes or Economically Weaker Sections or Women in
accordance with the provisions of the sub rule (2) of mile & of
the Gujarat Civil Services Classification and Recruitment
(General) Rules, 1967.
Provided further that the upper age limit may also be
relaxed in favour of a candidate who is already in the service
of the Gandhinagar Municipal Corporation in accordance with
the provisions of the Gujarat Civil Services. Classification and
Recruitment (General) Rules, 1967 as amended from time to
time.
(b) possess
(i) a Bachelor's degree obtained from any of the Universities
established or incorporated by or under the Central or State
Act in India or any other educational institution recognized as
such or declared to be deemed as a university under section 3
of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, and
Completed the Divisional officers Course or the Fire
Prevention course recognized by the National Fire Service
College, Nagpur, or
(ii) a degree of Bachelor of Engineering (Fire) Bachelor of
Technology (Fire)/Bachelor of Engineering (Fire and safety)
Bachelor of Technology (Fire and safety)/ Bachelor of Science
(Fire) obtained from any of the Universities established or
incorporated by or under the Central or State Act in India or
any other educational institution recognized as such or
declared to be deemed as a university under section 3 of the
University Grants Commission Act, 1956;
(c) have at least seven years' service experience in a whole
time in the Field of Fire Brigade out of which three years'
experience on the post which can be considered equivalent to
the post not below rank of Station Officer or Assistant
Divisional officer in Government or Local body or Government
Undertaking Board or Corporation of Limited Company
established under the Companies Act, 2013"
15. In the advertisement issued in July, 2024 in paragraph
No.3, similar requirement has been specified. It is the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/552/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
case of the respondent No.1 that as mentioned in sub-
clause (i) to clause (b) of Rule 3 of the Chief Fire Officer
Rules, 2024, the experience gained by the candidate
after completion of the Divisional Officer Course can only
be considered for satisfying 7 years experience as
prescribed in Clause (c) to Rule 3 of the Chief Fire Officer
Rules, 2024, whereas the appellant is claiming that the
experience gained by him prior to clearing the Course is
also required to be added.
16. So far as this experience, after completion of the
Divisional Officer Course is concerned, the parties are ad
idem. The appellant in his representation dated
07.03.2025 has also admitted that he is having 6 years 9
months and 10 days experience after completion of the
Divisional Fire Officer's Course.
17. The Clause (c) to Rule 3 of the Chief Fire Officer Rules,
2024, mentions about "having atleast seven years'
service experience in a whole time in the field of Fire
Brigade out of which three years' experience on the post,
which can be considered equivalent to the post not below
rank of Station Officer...."
18. The requirement of seven years' experience though is
composite has exclusive feature of three years'
experience in the Fire Brigade on the post, which can be
considered equivalent to the post not below the rank of
Station Officer. Thus, out of total seven years' experience
in Fire Brigade, three years should be on the respective.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/552/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
The appellant has attempted to bifurcate it into two parts
of 4 years and 3 years, but the language of Rule 3(c)
does not envisage this feature. It only commands of
distinct experience of three years on a post in Fire
Brigade. If the Rule making authority had the intention to
include the experience gained before acquiring the
educational qualification as required under Rule 3(b)(i),
the same could have formed the part of Rule 3. There is
no positive covenant permitting the inclusion of
experience prior to attaining the qualification in the
entire Rule 3, hence the contention of the appellant
about bifurcation of experience in Rule 3 does not merit
acceptance.
19. The appellant has cleared his Divisional Officers Course
on 17.04.2017, and thereafter, he has rendered service
for 6 years and 9 months and 10 days in Junagadh
Municipal Corporation and Ahmedabad Municipal
Corporation as per his own admission. The appellant is
asserting that the below mentioned period is also
required to be added in counting seven years: -
(i) 9 months experience as Fire Officer in Vinod Fabrics
Pvt. Ltd.
(ii) 1 year experience as Fire Officer in Arvind Limited.
20. Unquestionably, the aforementioned period of one year
and nine months is gained before he has acquired the
qualification of Divisional Officers Course. At this stage, it
would be apposite to refer to Clause 6(2)(a) of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/552/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
Advertisement, which mandates that unless otherwise
provided in the advertisement, the experience gained
from the date of acquiring the requisite qualifications will
be considered. The provision of Rule 3(c) of the Chief Fire
Officer Rules, 2024, has to be read in harmony with
Clause 6(2)(a) of the Advertisement, and not in isolation.
Seven years' experience has to be counted from the date
of acquiring the requisite qualification.
21. Clause (c) to Rule 3 of the Chief Fire Officer Rules, 2024,
which prescribes seven years' experience, cannot be
applied in the manner, as suggested by the appellant.
The Rule only emphasis of experience of three years on
the post not below the rank of Station Officer or Assistant
Divisional Officer in Government or a Local Body or
Government Undertaking Board or Corporation or Limited
Company established under the Companies Act, 2013.
The specification of 3 years' experience on the post
cannot be construed in a manner that the rest of 4 years'
experience has to be counted de hors the requirement of
qualifications. Neither the Rules nor the clauses of
advertisement bifurcate 7 years' experience i.e prior to
qualifications or thereafter. Thus, the entire seven years'
experience has to be counted after a candidate acquires
the requisite qualification of completion of the Divisional
Fire Officers Course.
22. Thus, the experience gained by the appellant as an Fire
Officer in Vinod Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., of 9 months from
11.05.2015 to 15.02.2016 and in Arvind Limited from
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/552/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
20.02.2016 to 19.02.2017, which comes to 1 years and 9
months cannot be satisfy the requirements of clause (c)
to Rule 3 of the Chief Fire Officer Rules, 2024 read with
General Instructions Clause No.6(2)(a) of the
Advertisement.
23. The case of the appellants also fails on an additional
ground. The Chief Fire Officer Rules, 2024 also refer to
the Rules of 1967. The Rule 8(8)(a) of the Rules, 1967 is
analogous to Clause 6(2)(a) of the advertisement. The
same reads as under : -
"8. Condition As to Prescribed Qualifications:
(8) Where the qualifications prescribed for any service or
post include a qualification as to practical experience of a
given period and applications are invited for such service or
post "the period of practical experience shall be computed-
(a) Unless otherwise provided in recruitment rule from
the date on which requisite qualifications are
obtained."
24. The aforesaid Rules of 1967 are the general rule of
recruitment framed under Article 309 of the Constitution
of India. It is settled legal precedent that even if there is
no specific provision in the special rules framed for the
recruitment to a post, the general rules shall prevail. In
the present case, the special recruitment rules do not
stipulate any provision for computation of period of 7
years of experience, hence, the provision of Rule 8(8)(a)
will come into play. The respondent no.1, by
incorporating an analogous condition no.6(2)(a), has
clarified that only the experience which is gained after
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/552/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
obtaining the requisite qualification shall be considered.
Hence, the experience of 6 years 9 months and 10 days
gained by the appellant, after procuring the necessary
qualification as envisaged under Rule 3(b)(i) of the Chief
Fire Officer Rules, 2024, can be exclusively considered,
and not the experience gained by him prior thereto.
25. The Supreme Court, in the case of
S.Gopalkrishnan(supra) on an similar issue, has held
thus:-
"5. When in addition to qualification, experience is prescribed, it
would only mean acquiring experience after obtaining the neces-
sary qualification and not before obtaining such qualification. In
the case of the respondent he obtained the ITI certificate in the
year 1994 and, therefore, did not possess five years of experi-
ence as required under the relevant rule. If his qualification as a
diploma holder in Mechanical Engineering is taken note of, he
has not completed three years of experience as he got the same
in April, 1996 and on relevant date he did not possess such qual-
ification. Indeed in prescribing qualification and experience, it is
also made clear in the general information instruction at Item
No. 6 that "experience will be computed after the date of acquir-
ing the necessary qualifications". Therefore, when this require-
ment was made very clear that he should have experience only
after acquiring the qualification, the view taken by the High
Court to the contrary either by the learned single Judge or the
Division Bench does not stand to reason."
26. The Apex Court, has thus, held that when in addition to
qualification, experience is prescribed, it would "only"
mean acquiring the necessary experience after obtaining
the necessary qualification, and prior to acquiring the
qualification.
27. Thus, on an overall analysis of the Rules 3(b(i) and 3(c)
of the Chief Fire Officer Rules, 2024 read with General
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/552/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
Instructions Clause No.6(2)(a) of the Advertisement, we
do not propose to differ from the view expressed by the
learned Single Judge.
28. As a sequel, the Letters Patent Appeal fails. The same is
dismissed. The connected civil application also stands
disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
Sd/-
(GITA GOPI,J)
MAHESH/01
