[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Patel Ankitaben Dharmeshkumar D/O ... vs State Of Gujarat on 30 March, 2026
Author: Nirzar S. Desai
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/5216/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5216 of 2025
==========================================================
PATEL ANKITABEN DHARMESHKUMAR D/O PATEL PRAKASHBHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
VATSAL S PARIKH(7452) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS DEVANSHI PATEL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) No. 1
MR PRANAV K TRIVEDI(9735) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 30/03/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard, learned Advocate, Mr. Parikh, for the petitioner,
learned AGP, Ms. Patel, for the Respondent-State and
learned Sr. Advocate, Mr. P.G. Desai, assisted by learned
Advocate, Mr. Trivedi, for Respondent No.2.
1.1 Learned Counsels appearing for the respective parties
jointly submitted that that have arrived at a consensus and
upon their consensus, the following order is passed;
(1) The present issue concerns the selection to
the post of laboratory assistant in Respondent
No.2-Institute of Kidney Disease and Research
Center. In the respondent Institution, there were
93 posts for laboratory assistant which were
vacant and for that purpose, an advertisement
was issued on 14.04.2023. The petitioner filled up
the form in EWS category. As per respondent
No.2-Institution, 167 candidates were called for
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/5216/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2026
undefined
the verification of the documents on different
dates.
(2) It is submitted by the learned Senior
Advocate appearing for respondent No.2 that 135
candidates came for the document verification. It
is borne out from the record that 110 candidates
were informed on 04.09.2024 for submitting the
documents on 12.09.2024. The 46 candidates
were informed on 28.01.2025 by mail to submit
the certificate on 29.01.2025. Three candidates
were informed by mail on 18.02.2025 to submit
the documents by 19.02.2025, and 8 candidates
were sent the mail on 19.02.2025 for submitting
the documents on 20.02.2025.
(3) From the affidavit in reply filed by the
Institute, it is borne out that 167 candidates were
informed through mail to remain present for
document verification. Out of total 167
candidates, 135 candidates remained present and
verified the documents, whereas 32 candidates
remained absent for document verification.
(4) The petitioner was informed by email on
28.01.2025 for document verification on
29.01.2025, but the petitioner did not remain
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/5216/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2026
undefined
present. The Institute appointed total 101
candidates and remaining candidates were placed
in a waiting list.
(5) The petitioner filed the above-mentioned
petition challenging the action of the respondent
for preparing the final merit list and prayed for
quashing and setting aside the final merit list
made on 11/13.03.2025. The grievance of the
petitioner is that the petitioner was not given
enough time for submitting the documents and
the merit list was pronounced, and the petitioner
was not considered on the ground that he has not
submitted the documents on the given date,
though otherwise as per marks petitioner was
qualified.
(6) When the matter was taken up for hearing,
this Court requested the learned Senior Advocate
appearing for respondent-Institution to look into
the issue, more particularly, the dire need of
laboratory assistants by the respondent
institution and also on account of the fact that
probably a via media could have been found out if
the Institution so desirous.
(7) It would appear that today, learned Senior
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/5216/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2026
undefined
Counsel Mr. Desai, under instructions of the
institution, would submit that the institution
would be ready and willing to accommodate the
petitioner in general category subject to certain
conditions, as the posts of EWS category have
already been filled up and there are vacancies in
general category. To which learned counsel under
instructions states that, the petitioner has no
objection to be appointed in general category.
(8) Learned Senior Counsel would further
submit that this Court may pass appropriate
order so as to ensure that such petitioner, may
not claim reservation benefit at a later stage.
(9) As against the same, learned advocate
appearing for the petitioner, who belongs to
reserved category (EWS Category), but who, by
the dint of the marks obtained by her, is entitled
to be placed in the unreserved/general category,
would submit that, subject to the submission
made by learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
respondent-Institute regarding the petitioner, if
the petitioner is appointed, the petitioner would
not raise any claim with regard to wages for the
period during which she has not served, and
whereas, the Institute may be directed to place
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/5216/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2026
undefined
such petitioner at her appropriate place in the
final merit list.
(10) Furthermore, learned advocate for the
petitioner would submit that the petitioner, who
claims placement on the basis of the marks
obtained by her in the selection process, is not
seeking such placement by virtue of EWS
category and, more particularly, that she had not
availed any benefit of relaxation available to the
said category. In view of the above, the following
directions would meet with the ends of justice:
(i) The respondent-Institute is directed, as
per the statement made by learned Senior
Advocate, Mr. Desai, to appoint the petitioner
in the general category. As per the statement
made by learned Senior Advocate Mr. Desai,
the petitioner shall file an undertaking before
this Court regarding giving up the claim of
seniority over persons, who have already been
appointed, as this appointment is made as a
standalone special case, only for the present
laboratory assistant advertisement, and the
order shall not be treated as a precedent in
any other appointment to be made by the
institution in future.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/5216/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2026
undefined
(ii) Since the present order is passed on the
consensus arrived at between the parties, the
Court has not gone into the merits of the
matter, and the same shall not be treated as
a precedent in respect of other appointments
of the Institution. The order cannot be used
as a precedent to raise any claim whatsoever
in future against the respondent-Institution.
(iii) The undertaking, which is to be filed
by the petitioner, shall be filed by the
petitioner within the period of two weeks,
from today.
1.2 With the above directions, the petition stands
disposed of, accordingly. Notice is discharged.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
UMESH/-
