Gujarat High Court
Maheshkumar Jayantilal Patani vs State Of Gujarat on 14 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/11779/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11779 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
MAHESHKUMAR JAYANTILAL PATANI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
SENIOR ADVOCATE MR.SHALIN MEHTA assisted by BHAVYARAJ K
GOHIL(8806) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR.ADITYA DAVDA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 14/10/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP Mr.Aditya
Davda waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of
respondent-State.
2. The present petition has been filed seeking the following
reliefs:-
"10. In view of above the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue
writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/11779/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
direction in the nature of writ and thereby:-
A. Your Lordship be pleased to hold and declare that the decision
of the Superintendent of Police, Surat dated 03.10.2011 declaring
the petitioner disqualified on the ground of color blindness,
annexed at Annexure-D, is manifestly arbitrary, illegal and in
violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India;
B. Your Lordship be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned
order dated 03.10.2011 annexed at Annexure-D, passed by the
Superintendent of Police, Surat, declaring the petitioner
disqualified on the ground of color blindness;
C. Your Lordship be pleased to direct the respondent to appoint
the petitioner to the post of Lok Rakshak with effect from the
date when the person below them in select list were appointed
with all consequential benefits.
D. Your Lordship be pleased to hold and declare that in view of
the orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and the
Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the cases of similarly situated
candidates, annexed at Annexures- M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T and U,
the petitioner is entitled to parity of treatment, and denial thereof
would be violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of
India.
E. To pass any other and further reliefs that may be deemed fit
and proper and in the interest of Justice and Equity."
3. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Shalin Mehta,
assisted by learned Advocate Mr. Bhavyaraj Gohil,
appearing for the petitioner, and learned AGP Mr. Aditya
Davda, appearing for the respondent-State.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/11779/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
4. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Mehta submits that
although in the earlier round of litigation, the petition
was dismissed on the ground of delay and was
subsequently affirmed by the Division Bench in an intra-
court appeal and thereafter by the Apex Court,
subsequent to the dismissal of the Special Leave Petition
(SLP), several similarly situated employees have
approached this Court, and orders have been passed in
their favour, which have also been upheld by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Mehta
further submits that the earlier petition was dismissed
solely on the ground of delay, without examination of the
merits of the case. Therefore, the present petition
deserves to be entertained, and the petitioner is entitled
to the same relief as has been granted to other similarly
situated employees.
5. Per contra, learned AGP Mr.Davda submits that once the
petition was dismissed and such dismissal was affirmed
up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is not open for this
Court to reopen an issue that has already attained
finality. Learned AGP Mr.Davda further contends that
entertaining such petitions would set a precedent,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/11779/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
enabling numerous other employees to raise similar
grievances on the ground that identically situated
employees have been granted relief, despite their own
claims having been previously rejected on grounds such
as delay. In view of the above, learned AGP Mr. Davda
prays for dismissal of the present petition.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the
learned advocates for the respective parties, it emerges
from the record that in the earlier round of litigation,
wherein the petitioner had approached this Court by
filing Special Civil Application No. 12147 of 2019, the
petition was not entertained by this Court on the ground
of delay, with detailed reasons assigned in the order. It
further appears that the said order was challenged by
way of an appeal before the Division Bench of this Court,
which also came to be dismissed by judgment and order
dated 06.08.2020. Thereafter, the Hon'ble Supreme
Court, vide order dated 06.05.2024, dismissed the
Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the present
petitioner, thereby affirming the orders passed by this
Court.
7. In the aforesaid background, this Court is of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/11779/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
considered opinion that it is not open for the present
petitioner to seek the relief which has already been
declined by this Court in the earlier round of litigation,
and which has attained finality. Accordingly, the petition
does not merit consideration and is liable to be
dismissed.
8. Resultantly, this petition is dismissed.
9. Rule is discharged.
(M. K. THAKKER,J)
NIVYA A. NAIR
