[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Rutbi Shantilal Bhansali vs State Of Gujarat on 1 December, 2025
Author: Nirzar S. Desai
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14684 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✓
==========================================================
RUTBI SHANTILAL BHANSALI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. NISARG N TRIVEDI(17294) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
ADITYA DAVDSA AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR PREMAL R JOSHI(1327) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 01/12/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Nisarg Trivedi for the
petitioner, learned AGP Mr. Davda for the State and learned
advocate Mr. Premal Joshi for the GPSC.
2. With the consent of the parties, the matter was taken up
finally. Hence, Rule. Learned AGP waives service of Rule on
behalf of Respondent-State and learned advocate Mr.Premal
Joshi waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent No.2-
GPSC.
3. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for a
direction to the respondent authorities to accept the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
candidature of the petitioner and has further prayed for a
direction to the respondent to treat her candidature as that of
a general category candidate in the interest of justice.
4. The case of the petitioner is that she is a resident of
Surat and had applied for the posts of Gujarat Administrative
Service (Class I), Gujarat Civil Service (Class I and II), and
Gujarat Municipal Chief Officer Service (Class II), pursuant to
Advertisement No. 47 of 2023-24 published by the GPSC. The
petitioner was declared ineligible for main exams after she
completed preliminary exams on the ground of non-production
of Gujarat specific EWS certificate.
5. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had
secured 213.78 marks in the preliminary exam held on 7th
January 2024, which is substantially higher than the prescribed
cut-off marks of 161.29 for the General (Female) category, and
despite that, the petitioner was held ineligible for the main
exams, though the petitioner was allowed to appear in the
main examination; and thereafter, after the main examination
was held and before the final merit could be published, the
petitioner was held to be ineligible for the post on the ground
that the petitioner could not produce the EWS certificate for
the relevant point of time.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
6. Learned advocate Mr. Trivedi pointed out that the
petitioner had produced the certificate dated 10.02.2023, which
is a valid certificate considering the advertisement published,
which provides that a certificate issued between 1.4.2021 to
8.9.2023 would be treated as a valid certificate. However,
according to the learned advocate Mr. Trivedi, the aforesaid
certificate was not a Gujarat-specific certificate issued by the
Mamlatdar, Surat City, Majura area, and the certificate was
issued in accordance with Government GR dated 11th February
2019 and not in accordance with Government GR dated 25th
January 2019, which is meant for reservation of the EWS
category in the State of Gujarat for the purpose of employment
in jobs related to the Gujarat Government and other
organizations.
6.1. Leaned Advocate Mr. Trivedi also submitted that even if
the petitioner's EWS certificate is considered to be invalid, in
that case also, as the petitioner has scored 213.78 marks in the
preliminary exams, which is much higher than the cut-off
marks of 161.29 for the General (Female) category and henc,
the petitioner's candidature could have been considered as that
of a General category candidate, and the petitioner could not
have been held ineligible for the post in question.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
6.2. Learned advocate Mr. Trivedi submitted that merely on
the ground that the petitioner could not submit a Gujarat-
specific certificate certifying that she belongs to the
Economically Weaker Section, the petitioner, being a
meritorious candidate, ought not to have had her claim
rejected by holding her ineligible.
6.3. Learned advocate Mr. Trivedi further submitted that the
certificate produced by the petitioner dated 10.02.2023 is
issued in consonance with the Government Resolution dated
11.02.2019 meant for Government of India jobs, which
provides for stricter conditions. Therefore, when the petitioner
is fulfilling all the criteria to fall within the EWS category as
per the stricter criteria provided under the Government GR
dated 11.02.2019, what was required to be considered by the
respondents was the object behind the reservation for the EWS
category, and the respondents could have been flexible in
considering the petitioner's case, as the petitioner has also
produced an EWS certificate issued by the competent authority.
However, as the same is meant for Government of India jobs,
the petitioner could not have been held ineligible.
6.4. Learned advocate Mr. Trivedi further submitted that in
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
case the petitioner's EWS certificate is found to be invalid,
even then the fact remains that the petitioner belongs to the
General category, and as the petitioner has scored higher
marks than the cut-off marks in the General (Female) category,
the petitioner's case ought to have been considered under the
General category. The action of the respondents in holding the
petitioner ineligible is absolutely unjustified and baseless, and
therefore, the said action is required to be quashed, and the
respondents may be directed to consider the candidature of the
petitioner as an eligible candidate, and on that basis, the
petitioner's name is required to be included in the merit list.
6.5. By making the above submissions, learned advocate Mr.
Trivedi prayed for allowing the petition by directing the
respondents either to allow the petitioner to participate in the
recruitment process by holding the petitioner to be eligible, or
to treat the petitioner as a General category candidate.
7. The petition was vehemently opposed by learned
advocate Mr. Premal Joshi appearing for the GPSC. Mr. Joshi
took the Court through the detailed affidavit filed by the GPSC
and made the following submissions.
7.1. The petitioner has produced the EWS certificate as per
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
Government GR dated 11.02.2019 which is meant for jobs for
reservation in respect of Economically Weaker Section under
Government of India. Mr. Joshi submitted that of course, there
are certain aspects which would make the requirement for
being considered to be of EWS category for Government of
India for the purpose of 10% reservation for being considered
as Economically Weaker Section candidate under Government
of India stricter, and apart from having gross annual income
below Rs. 8 lakh, there are additional conditions for being
considered as EWS candidate, and a person whose family owns
or possesses any of the following assets is required to be
excluded from being identified as Economically Weaker Section
irrespective of family income. Those four aspects as per
Government GR dated 11.02.2019 are as under;
(I) 5 acres of agricultural land and above;
(ii) Residential flat of 1000 sq. ft. and above;
(iii) Residential plot of 100 sq. yards and above in
notified municipalities;
(iv) Residential plot of 200 sq. yards and above in areas
other than the notified municipalities.
7.2. Apart from that, learned advocate Mr. Joshi also
submitted that the aforesaid G.R. also provides that the
property held by the family at different locations or cities
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
would also be clubbed while considering the person's claim as
to whether he belongs to the Economically Weaker Section.
Mr. Joshi submitted that though the petitioner's certificate
issued pursuant to the 11.02.2019 G.R. is issued by considering
the aforesaid stricter parameters, but the fact remains that the
Gujarat-specific EWS certificate requires particular details about
whether the petitioner used to reside in Gujarat prior to 01-04-
1978 or not, and only upon providing such details that
certificate be issued. According to learned advocate Mr. Joshi,
in the instant case, the petitioner was well aware of the fact
that those requirements are must to get the Gujarat-specific
certificate in consonance with Government G.R. dated 25th
January 2019. As the petitioner could not produce the details
about the school leaving certificate before 1978 of her father
as well as the proof of the father of the petitioner being a
permanent resident or migrant before 1978, and therefore, as
the petitioner was not able to get the EWS certificate as per
the conditions laid down in the G.R. dated 25th January 2019,
the petitioner opted for a certificate in consonance with the
criteria laid down in the G.R. dated 11.02.2019 from the
Mamlatdar, Surat City, and applied for the post on the basis of
the same.
7.3. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi submitted that this was not a
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
bona fide mistake on the part of the petitioner that instead of
the required certificate some other similar certificate granting
her status of an EWS candidate was produced by the
petitioner. But, this was a conscious decision taken by the
petitioner to apply on the basis of a certificate which cannot
be said to be a valid certificate in view of the specific clause
in the advertisement.
7.4. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi drew the attention of the
Court to clause 8 of the advertisement, whereby in sub-clause
7 it is specifically provided that only a certificate certifying
that a person belongs to the EWS category, issued by the
authority in consonance with Government G.R. dated 25th
January 2019, would be considered for the purpose of the job.
Despite that, the petitioner produced the certificate as per
Government G.R. dated 11th February 2019 and applied for
the post.
7.5. According to learned advocate Mr. Joshi, this was a
deliberate attempt to take a chance before the authority for
the purpose of recruitment, knowing fully well that the
aforesaid certificate is invalid. Mr. Joshi further submitted that
the petitioner was well aware about the aforesaid fact as the
advertisement itself provides that upon every candidate making
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
an application, even without verification of documents, those
persons would be allowed to appear in the preliminary exam,
and the document verification stage would come only in
respect of candidates who could clear the preliminary
examination.
7.6. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi drew the attention of this
Court to clause number 18 and sub-clauses 1, 2 and 3, and on
the basis of that pointed out that the verification of documents
would come after a person clears the preliminary examination,
and therefore it was a case of taking a chance knowing fully
well that the petitioner does not possess the required
certificate, and despite that, the petitioner tried to take a
chance for appearing in the examination. Therefore, the act of
the petitioner can be said to be a deliberate act as, despite
knowing fully well that she does not possess the required
certificate, she has tried to participate in the examination; and
upon clearing the preliminary examination, the petitioner is
now seeking a relief which, if granted, would run contrary to
the advertisement.
7.7. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi drew the attention of this
Court to Annexure-F (at page 107 of the petition), whereby the
petitioner herself has produced on record a letter dated 7th
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
July 2025. In the said letter, the petitioner has categorically
accepted the fact that the petitioner could not produce the
'proof of permanent residence for migrants before 1978' or the
'father's school leaving certificate before 1978', as it was not
possible for the petitioner to arrange those documents, and
therefore, the petitioner could not avail the Gujarat
Government EWS certificate. By referring the said letter, Mr.
Joshi submitted that when the petitioner was fully aware that
she was applying for the post despite not possessing the
necessary documents, her candidature was rightly held to be
ineligible by the GPSC.
7.8. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi thereafter submitted that the
petitioner is misrepresenting the procedure of the examination,
as the preliminary examination marks would not be counted
towards the merit list, and that examination is only meant for
screening purposes.
7.9. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi pointed out the aforesaid fact
from clause 17(10), where it is categorically stated that the
preliminary examination is only a screening test and the marks
obtained in the preliminary examination shall not be
considered for the purpose of the final select list. Therefore,
the petitioner's claim that she has scored 213.78 marks in the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
preliminary examination, whereas the cut-off marks for the
General (Female) category in the preliminary examination is
161.29 marks, is irrelevant and therefore, the same is not
required to be considered.
7.10. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi then drew the attention of
the Court to sub-clause 9 of clause 8 and submitted that clause
8 of the advertisement relates to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled
Tribe, Socially and Economically Backward Classes, and
Economically Weaker Section. Sub-clause 9 of clause 8 provides
that if a candidate has applied for the post under a particular
category, any subsequent request to change the category, even
to the General category, shall not be entertained. In the instant
case, the alternative prayer made by the petitioner to consider
her case as that of a General category candidate cannot be
considered in light of sub-clause 9 of clause 8 of the
advertisement. Therefore, according to Mr. Joshi, when the
petitioner had applied with open eyes that she did not meet
the requirement in the form of producing an Economically
Weaker Section certificate meant for the Gujarat State, and had
already applied under the advertisement with a certificate
meant for the Government of India, the petitioner's claim is
required to be rejected outrightly.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
8. I have heard learned advocates for the parties and
perused the record.
9. On perusal of the record, I found that the advertisement
categorically speaks about the fact that the petitioner must
produce an EWS certificate, which should be Gujarat-specific,
as can be seen from sub-clause (7) of clause 8, which provides
that an EWS candidate must produce a certificate to that effect
issued in consonance with Government G.R. dated 25th
January 2019. For the perusal of the Court and for
comparison, Mr. Joshi has placed on record both the
Government Resolutions dated 25th January 2019 and 11th
February 2019. The Court found that though the Government
Resolution dated 11th February 2019 provides for stricter
conditions to be considered as an Economically Weaker Section
candidate, namely: first, if a candidate or his family owns 5
acres agricultural land or above; second, if the candidate or
family owns a residential flat of 1,000 square feet or abvoe;
third, a residential plot of 100 square yards and above in
notified municipalities; and fourth, a residential plot of 200
square yards and above in areas other than notified
municipalities. In that case, those persons would be excluded
from getting the status of Economically Weaker Section.
Further, sub-clause (3) of clause 1 provides that for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
aforesaid purpose, the property held by a family in different
locations or different places/cities would also be clubbed while
applying the land or property-holding test to determine
Economically Weaker Section status. Therefore, though at first
glance, it seems that Government GR dated 11th February
2019 provides for stricter conditions for being considered as
Economically Weaker Section, and therefore, when the
petitioner is meeting the aforesaid criteria, her candidature as
an Economically Weaker Section candidate ought to have been
considered by the Government. But in fact, what is important,
or what is the basic difference between Government GR dated
25th January 2019 and Government GR dated 11th February
2019, is that the Gujarat-specific certificate is provided vide
Government GR dated 25th January 2019. The aforesaid GR at
the top indicates that while issuing the aforesaid GR, reference
was made to Government GR dated 23rd January 2019, and
more particularly, clause 6 of the said GR provides that 'this
10% reservation policy introduced by Gujarat State shall be
applicable for the admissions and appointments under Gujarat
State and shall be available to the original inhabitants of
Gujarat State i.e., those who have been permanently settled in
Gujarat State on or prior to 01.04.1978,' meaning thereby that
the aforesaid GR is aimed at providing 10% reservation only to
persons who are permanent residents of Gujarat prior to 01-04-
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
1978 and their families. Therefore, the basic difference
between the Gujarat-specific GR and the Government of India-
specific GR is that the Gujarat-specific GR dated 25th January
2019 is based on GR dated 23rd January 2019, which provides
for issuance of a certificate only to a person whose family
were residents of Gujarat prior to 01-04-1978, and for all other
persons, if they meet the requirements of GR dated 11-02-
2019, such a certificate would be issued as per the 11-02-2019
GR. In the instant case, the petitioner herself has admitted,
vide letter dated 7th July 2025, which is produced at page 107
by the petitioner herself, which reads as under;
"To Shri Hasmukh Patel, IPS (Retd.)
Gujarat Public Service Commission Gandhinagar
Gujarat-382010 Date: 7th July, 2025
Subject: Regarding EWS certificate query raised by the
commission.
Respected Chairman Sir,
This is RUTBI SHANTILAL BHANSALI Conf. No.:
68894708 1 upplied for Advt. No.: GPSC/2022324/47. In
application I have filled my candidature through EWS
Category. Regarding this, a query has been raised to
submit EWS issued by the Government of Gujarat.
Sir, I qualify as EWS, as I meet the income and
landholding criteria specified by the Govemment of India
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
and Government of Gujarat. However, initially I have
only made EWS from the Central Government as I was
unaware of the mandatory requirement of Gujarat
government's EWS in GPSC.
Now due to certain different documentation requirements
like 'proof of permanent residence for migrants dated
before 1978' or 'Father's school leaving certificate before
1978", both documents are not possible for me to arrange
at this moment. Hence, I could not avail Gujarat
Government EWS Certificate at present.
It is relevant to point out that even if you may not
consider me as an EWS candidate for any kind of
omission on my part yet even then I would request you
for consideration under the Unreserved category.
Sir, I may also indicate that I secured 213.78 marks,
which is admittedly more marks than the cutoff marks
for General category (161.29), therefore I request you to
allow me to participate in further recruitment process
considering me a General category/Unreserved category
candidate. Therefore, it is my humble request to you to
move my candidature to Unreserved Category rather than
cancelling my candidature completely.
I sincerely apologise for not knowing the need of State
specific EWS criteria beforehand, since I was of the
perception that criterias are more stringent for Central
Govemment's EWS and I meet them all in full
requirements, therefore it would be valid proof to
ascertain my income status to claim the quota.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
However, I hope this matter will be looked into
judiciously and my request to move my application to
General Category will be taken into consideration. Thank
you very much Sir!
Yours Respectfully
Sd/- "
10. The aforesaid letter would clearly indicate that the
petitioner was well aware of the fact that she was not in a
position to get the certificate certifying her EWS status as per
Government GR dated 25th January 2019, and as she was not
having the required documents to obtain the EWS certificate
under the GR dated 25th January 2019, and therefore, a
conscious decision was taken by the petitioner to apply for the
post on the basis of the Government of India-specific
certificate issued in consonance with Government GR dated 11-
02-2019. Therefore, if such a practice is encouraged by the
Court by allowing the petition, it would not only set a wrong
precedent, but at the same time, encourage candidates to apply
on the basis of whatever documents they have and thereafter
approach the Court to put forward claims which, from the
very beginning, are not in consonance with the requirements
of the advertisement. Such an attempt cannot be encouraged,
and therefore, when the petitioner was well aware that the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
requirement for applying for the post was an EWS certificate
issued under Government GR dated 25th January 2019, and
when she has taken conscious decision knowing fully well that
a certificate issued under Government GR dated 11-02-2019,
such an application cannot be said to be a valid application,
and therefore, the petitioner was rightly held ineligible for the
selection process.
11. Further, the petitioner has also prayed that her case may
not be considered as an EWS candidate and that she may
instead be considered under the general category, in view of
the fact that she has secured 213.78 marks as against 161.29
marks, which is the cut-off for the general (female) category.
This submission of learned advocate Mr. Trivedi also cannot be
accepted, for the simple reason that the advertisement, and
more particularly clause 17(10), provides that the marks
obtained by a candidate in the preliminary examination are
only for the purpose of screening and shall not be considered
while preparing the final merit list or select list. In the instant
case, the marks referred by the petitioner were the marks
scored by the petitioner at the stage of the preliminary exam,
and therefore, when such marks would not in any way be
counted for determining the final merit, the petitioner's case
cannot be considered on the basis of the aforesaid marks
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14684/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
scored by the petitioner, as those marks would never be the
marks which can be considered towards final merit.
12. Even otherwise, clause 8(9), which is a specific clause in
respect of Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, Socially and
Economically Backward Class and Economically Weaker
Section, provides that once a person has applied under a
particular category, any request for change of category, even if
he or she wants to change it to the general category, shall not
be entertained. That also would indicate that once the
petitioner has applied under the EWS category, the petitioner
would not be permitted to have her case considered under the
general category. Therefore, the petitioner's claim and the
submission of the advocate for the petitioner that the
petitioner's case is required to be considered as a general
category candidate if her EWS certificate is not held to be
valid, also cannot be considered in view of sub-clause 9 of
clause 8 of the advertisement.
13. Accordingly, the petition fails in view of the observations
and discussions made hereinabove, and the petition is required
to be dismissed and same is dismissed. Rule discharged. No
order as to costs.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
BHAVIN MEHTA
