Gujarat High Court
Nareshkumar Arjunbhai Makwana vs State Of Gujarat on 11 August, 2025
Author: Nikhil S. Kariel
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/9807/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9807 of 2025
==========================================================
NARESHKUMAR ARJUNBHAI MAKWANA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MA PAREKH(1088) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS TANUSHREE SHRIMAL, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 11/08/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. M.A. Parekh for the petitioner and
learned AGP Ms. Tanushree Shrimal for the respondent-State.
2. While the present petition is preferred inter alia seeking that the
respondents should treat the services of the petitioner from 07.12.2024,
till date, as continuous service, minus the period he had been in custody,
and also for regular pay scale and all incidental benefits, yet, it would
appear to this Court that as of now, the respondents have not taken in
decision insofar as the above grievances are concerned and whereas
attention of this Court is drawn by the petitioner to the representations
which have been forwarded to the concerned District Primary Education
Officer, Bhavnagar, which are still pending consideration.
3. It would appear in this regard that while the petitioner had been
appointed as a Vidhya Sahayak in the year 2004, his services came to be
suspended upon an FIR filed against him and whereas while a learned
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had granted regular bail to the present
petitioner vide order dated 29.02.2008, the services of the petitioner had
thereafter been continued vide an order dated 02.02.2009, which was
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/9807/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025
undefined
subject to final outcome of the prosecution. It would appear that the
petitioner had been given a clean acquittal by the learned Trial Court vide
judgment and order dated 17.05.2024 and whereas, the request of the
petitioner for confirmation in service etc. has fallen on deaf ears. It
would appear in this regard that at the first instance, before this Court
adjudicates as to the entitlement of the petitioner, it would be just and
proper to direct the appropriate authority i.e. the respondent No.3 herein
to decide the representation preferred by the petitioner dated 25.03.2025,
within a stipulated time. In the peculiar facts of the case, it would also be
appropriate to direct the respondent No. 3 to, before taking a final
decision, give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
4. Having regard to the above observations, the following directions
would meet with the ends of justice.
(i) The respondent No.3-District Primary Education Officer,
Bhavnagar, shall decide the representation preferred by the petitioner
dated 25.03.2025, if necessary, in consultation with the respondent No.2
herein, within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of this order.
(ii) It is further directed that the respondent No.3 before passing any
final order shall afford an appropriate opportunity of personal hearing to
the petitioner.
(iii) The respondent No.3 shall take a decision strictly on the merits of
the matter and whereas it is clarified that this Court has not gone into the
same.
(iv) It is further direct that the respondent No.3 shall pass a speaking
order with reasons.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/9807/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025
undefined
5. With the above observations and directions, the present petition
stands disposed of.
6. Needles to clarify that in case the petitioner is aggrieved by the
said decision, it would be open for the petitioner to assail the same before
appropriate forum in accordance with law.
Direct service is permitted.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
BDSONGARA
