Patel Dharmeshkumar Khandubhai vs State Of Gujarat

Biren Vaishnav, J

RULE returnable forthwith. Mr.Utkarsh Sharma learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent State.

With the consent of learned advocates for the respective parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing.

Mr.Hardik Jani learned advocate for the petitioner would submit that if an order on lines similar to the order passed by this Court in Special Civil Application Nos.15656 of 2018 if passed, the ends of justice would be met.

The order passed by the coordinate bench of this Court in Special Civil Application Nos.15656 of 2018 reads as under:

“Heard learned advocate Mr. H. J. Trivedi for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Krina Calla for the respondent state and its authorities.

By filling the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner, who is teacher working under the respondents, has prayed for issuance of direction to the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner for the purpose of grant.

The petitioner has relied on Government Resolution dated 24.10.2017 of the Education Department in support of his prayer for regularization and payment of grant. It was stated that the competent authority has issued orders declaring the respondent school as single unit and standard 11 and standard 12 are treated as one unit for the purpose of grant.

3.1 It appears that the petitioner joined the Higher Secondary Section as Teacher in the respondent No.5 school run by a Charitable Trust. The Higher Secondary Section run by the school was not aided. The petitioner worked as Teacher under the school in the Higher Secondary Section accordingly as Trust spent its own funds. He has been serving till date.

3.2 The Education Department of the State Government passed Resolution dated 27.04.2011 taking a decision to treat the secondary and higher secondary sections as single unit in the schools which were earlier treated as separate units. A decision was also taken to regularize the services of the Teachers who were appointed by the school in the higher secondary section during its non-granted status. A condition was imposed that for the purpose of regularization of such Teachers, they should have passed the TAT examination and that their job profile were sanctioned by the District Education Officer at the time of their appointment.

3.3 The school management has sent communication dated 3.11.2017 to the Education Department requesting to regularise the services of the petitioner as was done in case of other teachers as per aforementioned Resolution dated 24.10.2017. It is the case of the petitioner that despite the application-cum-representation, no steps are taken, on the contrary the apprehension has arisen that the services of the petitioner shall be terminated by placing another candidate thereby overlooking the request for regulariastion.

3.4 It was uncontrovertedly stated that the services of other teachers belonging to the same class to which the petitioner belongs came to be regularised by respondent no.1 under Resolution dated 24.10.2017, however, the petitioner was left out in the for the reasons best known to the authorities, which according to the petitioner was arbitrary.

It was submitted by learned advocate for the petitioner that though the petitioner has been satisfying all the requirements and conditions mentioned in the policy as above, necessary decision is not being taken despite long passage of time

In the aforesaid circumstances, this petition deserves to be disposed of by directing respondent No.2 to take a necessary decision for regularizing the services of the petitioners in the higher secondary section of the school in question in light and in accordance with the policy Resolution dated 24.10.2017 of the Education Department.

For the purpose of taking such decision, the present petition shall be treated as a representation by the authority and the decision shall be taken within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order without insisting for certified copy.

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Direct service is permitted.”

Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondent No.2 is directed to take a necessary decision for regularizing the services of the petitioners in the higher secondary section of the school in question in light and in accordance with the policy Resolution dated 24.10.2017 of the Education Department.

For the purpose of taking such decision, the present petition shall be treated as a representation by the authority and the decision shall be taken within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order without insisting for certified copy.

Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.