BUKHAREE AEZAZALEE MAKHADUMALEE Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE matter was heard at length at admission stage itself, and as parties' pleadings were already on the record the Counsel for the petitioner requested the Court for treating the lengthy arguments as final arguments and dispose the matter finally at this stage itself, as the petitioner who has cleared successfully the competitive examination and viva voce conducted by Gujarat High Court Respondent No.2 hereinabove and whose name has also been included in the Select List finally prepared by the Respondent No. 2 and forwarded to the State, respondent no.1 hereinabove for doing the needful at their end, is illegally and arbitrarily dropped by the Respondent no.1 and passage of usual and longer time may bring about irreversible situation and create equities which may defeat the very cause of justice. The life of select is also only one year from the date of its publication. The Counsels for both the respondents also agreed that this matter may be disposed off finally at admission stage itself as there was nothing more to be added or argued hence the matter is being disposed off finally at this stage by this judgment and order.

(2.) THE petitioner, a duly selected candidate for the post of Civil Judge by the respondent no.2 and whose name was forwarded to the State Government along with other successful candidates for obtaining opinion of the Competent Authority and doing the needful and who has been dropped from the select list on account of adverse opinion received by the State from the competent authority, and hence who has not been appointed as Civil Judge, has approached this court invoking Articles 14, 16, 234, 235 and 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the action being arbitrary illegal and hence praying that it may be quashed and set aside and appropriate direction and writ in nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ be issued to the respondents for appointing petitioner as Civil Judge pursuant to his selection by respondent no.2.

(3.) THE respondent no.2 vide advertisement no. RC/0719/2011 dated 4/7/2011 invited applications from the eligible candidates for recruitment to the post of Civil Judges. The petitioner being eligible candidate applied vide his application dated 19/7/2011. The petitioner was invited to take elimination test which was held on 11/9/2011, petitioner was allotted seat no. 3317, the result of the elimination test was declared on 13/9/201. As petitioner succeeded in the elimination test, he was to take main written examination which was conducted on 16/10/2011. The petitioner appeared and succeeded in the main-written examination also as per result declared on 30/11/2011. Out of 368 candidates declared successful in the final test petitioner's name figured at Sr. no. 128. In terms of provision of Clause No. 15(ix) and (x) of the advertisement dated 4/7/2011, petitioner was to submit requisite language certificate and the practice/experience certificate in the prescribed form issued by the competent authority. The petitioner submitted both the certificates. Petitioner was also required to submit character certificate obtained from two respectable persons as required under clause 15 (viii). The petitioner accordingly submitted such character certificates. The petitioner received letter on 8/12/2011 issued by respondent no.2 informing petitioner that as petitioner had succeeding in main examination he was to appear for oral interview (viva-voce) to be conducted on 18/12/2011. Accordingly petitioner appeared for the oral interview held on 18/12/2011. The final select list consisting of 137 candidates against required vacancies was declared by respondent no.2 on 9/3/2012. The petitioner's name figures therein at Sr. no.61. The petitioner received communication on 30/3/2012 from respondent no.1 calling upon the petitioner to remain personally present before Dy. Secretary on 13/4/2012 and submit documents. Police verification was over right in the month of April 2012 as contended by the petitioner. On 1/5/2012 petitioner received communication from Commissioner of Health, Medical Services & Medical Education, Gandhinagar, referring him to medical board for medical test as his name was figuring at Sr. no. 61 in the final select list. Petitioner subjected himself to medical test on 23/5/2012 and after a detailed medical examination the medical board found nothing which could be held against the petitioner, submitted opinion. On 31/7/2012 respondent no.1 displayed list of candidates being appointed to the post of Civil Judges. As per the recommendation of respondent no.2 petitioner's name which was originally at Sr. no. 61 in the select list was not there in the list and hence petitioner was constrained to file present petition on the grounds mentioned there in.