Gujarat High Court
Bhajgotar Narendrabhai Bhikhabhai vs State Of Gujarat on 12 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/10021/2017 ORDER DATED: 12/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10021 of 2017
==========================================================
BHAJGOTAR NARENDRABHAI BHIKHABHAI & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MILAN R MARUTI(7338) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,2,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,3,30,31,32,33,34,35,
36,37,38,39,4,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,5,6,7
MR PA JADEJA(3726) for the Petitioner(s) No. 10,11,12,2,5,6,8,9
MR PM LAKHANI(1326) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,3,30,31,32,33,34,35,3
6,37,38,39,4,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,7
MRS R P LAKHANI(3811) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,3,30,31,32,33,34,35,3
6,37,38,39,4,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,7
MS MANISHA L SHAH, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL with
MR JAY TRIVEDI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 - STATE
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Respondent(s) No. 5,6,7,8,9
MR PRADIP J PATEL(5896) for the Respondent(s) No. 10
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 12/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocates.
2. It is jointly submitted by the learned advocates for
the respective parties that similar issue has been decided by
this Court vide order dated 01.08.2025 recorded on Special
Civil Application No.122 of 2025, therefore, identical order
may be passed in this matter.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/10021/2017 ORDER DATED: 12/09/2025
undefined
3. In view of above, the following order is passed
accordingly, as requested.
4. Learned advocates for the respective petitioners
submit that the issue regarding regularization, as mainly
prayed for by the petitioners in this petition, is squarely
covered by the decision of the learned Coordinate Bench
dated 01.07.2016 recorded on Special Civil Application
No.13621 of 2014 and allied matters.
5. Considering the decision passed by the learned
Coordinate Bench, it would appear that while the request for
grant of regularization to similarly situated employees had
not been considered, whereas, the learned Coordinate Bench
had directed that the petitioners shall be allowed to continue
on their contractual appointment and would not be replaced
by other set of contractual employees and they shall be
continued till the scheme continues subject to evaluation of
their performance and subject to Discipline and Appeal Rules
as may be applicable, etc.
6. Since learned advocate/s for the contesting
respondent/s does not contest the issue with regard to
petitioners being similarly situated to the petitioners of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/10021/2017 ORDER DATED: 12/09/2025
undefined
said group of petitions, the directions issued by the
Coordinate Bench at paragraph No.52 should also ensure in
favour of the present petitioners.
7. The directions issued by the learned Coordinate
Bench from paragraphs No.52.1 to 52.7 are reproduced
hereinbelow for benefit :-
"52.1 The prayer of the petitioners to
regularize their contractual services and
make them permanent on the establishment
is rejected. Limited immunity that is made
available to the petitioners is by allowing
them to continue on their contractual
employment and not to be replaced by
other set of contractual employees on ad-
hocism. The petitioners shall be continued
in the existing cadre as long as the said
Scheme continues, but purely on contractual
basis and such employment shall be
coterminous with the scheme, subject to
evaluation of their performance, service and
disciplinary rules as may be made
applicable to them. The respondent-State
shall insist on periodical up-gradation of
knowledge, improvisation of technical skill
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/10021/2017 ORDER DATED: 12/09/2025
undefined
and overall preparedness on the subject, so
also on computerization.
52.2 The challenge to the
Government Resolutions dated December 23,
2013 and August 28, 2014 and the
consequential process of recruitment
undertaken in the year 2014 pursuant to
the public advertisement dated August 28,
2014, succeeds qua the petitioners only.
Those petitioner who have qualified in the
last examination of the year 2014 shall be
continued on contractual employment
without insistence on their fresh
appointment by the respondent-State. The
respondent-authorities shall renew the
petitioners' contract of service on the same
terms and conditions as continued so far.
52.3 Those petitioners who have
cleared the examination and not qualified
in the process of recruitment of the year
2014, shall not be discontinued, if already
on contractual service pursuant to their
selection through legally permissible mode
in the years 2009 and 2011.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/10021/2017 ORDER DATED: 12/09/2025
undefined
52.4 Those of the petitioners who
have approached this Court after their
termination on account of non-extension of
their contractual employment, but otherwise
given appointment after selection under the
Rules/ on following public advertisement,
shall be restored to continue on their
original posts. This shall be considered as
their contractual employment without any
break.
52.5 It is being clarified that those
appointments which have been made freshly
pursuant to the aforementioned resolutions
and process of selection under challenge in
the year 2014, in no manner, shall be
affected by this judgment.
52.6 It is being clarified that in
absence of any policy of the State to grant
permanency in any of the cadres at the
District, Taluka or Gram Panchayat levels,
the issue of the length of service of the
petitioners deserves no adjudication.
However, if any such policy in future is
made by the State, the petitioners shall be
at liberty to raise the contention of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/10021/2017 ORDER DATED: 12/09/2025
undefined
continuation and shall be entitled to raise
the issue of the length of service from the
date of their initial appointment. This
Court has not concluded the said issue in
the present group of petitions and has left
the same for the petitioners to contend at
an appropriate time in the future, if the
occasion so arises.
52.7 As a parting note, it is being
observed that this Court would fail in its
duty if it does not act as a catalyst in the
words of the Apex Court and draws the
attention of the State Government that if
may need to take a policy decision in
respect of creating permanent establishment
where contractual appointments have
continued for more than a decade and its
continuation is still felt by gearing up at
all levels. Since it entails large financial
implication, a marathon exercise is begging
the attention of the State."
8. As observed hereinabove, the said directions would
hold good in favour of the present petitioners also.
9. With these directions and above observations, the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/10021/2017 ORDER DATED: 12/09/2025
undefined
present petition stands disposed of as partly allowed.
10. As requested, it is needless to say that it would
be open for the petitioners to avail appropriate remedy under
the law, if any cause survives.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J)
M.H. DAVE
