SCA/603719/1986 1/5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6037 of 1986 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6526 of 1986 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2542 of 1987 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1244 of 1987 HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ====================================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ====================================================== C M KAMDAR & 6 - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s) ====================================================== Appearance : MR NK MAJMUDAR for Petitioner in SCA No.6037/1986 & Mr. Jashwant Shah, AGP for respondent. Mr. P.V. Hathi for petitioner in SCA No.6526/1986 & Mr. Jashwant K. Shah, AGP for respondents. SCA/603719/1986 2/5 JUDGMENT Mrs K.A. Mehta, for Petitioner in SCA No.2542/1987 & Mr. Jashwant K. Shah,AGP for respondents. Mr. Manoj N. Popat for Petitioner in SCA No.1244/1987 & Mr. Jashwant K.Shah, AGP for respondents. ====================================================== CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 22/12/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. In Special Civil Application Nos.6037/1986, 6526/1986 and 2542/1987 the petitioners have challenged the interpretation of the Gujarat Lower Revenue qualifying Examination Rules, 1978 framed by the Government of Gujarat in exercise of powers under Article 302 of the Constitution of India and validity of some of these rules. In SCA No.1244/87 the petitioners have prayed for for a direction to the respondents to consider the case of all the petitioners for promotion to the Gujarat Development Service, Class-II and to permanently restrain the respondents from promoting the Juniors to the petitioners. 2. The issue raised in the above petition is squarely covered by a decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court on 16th December 1983 in Special Civil Application No.2860/83 and other allied matters. 3. For the reasons stated in the said judgement the following directions are issued in Special Civil Application Nos.6037/1986, 6526/1986 and 2542/1987: SCA/603719/1986 3/5 JUDGMENT I. It is necessary that in each of the districts, the District Collector concerned should prepare the seniority list on the following principles: [1] Those clerks who have passed the qualifying examination i.e. LRDE within specified period and specified chances are entitled to re- arrangement of seniority inter-se with the persons of their own class on the basis of seniority (Rule 9) those who are seniors to them but who passed subsequently and beyond specified period and specified chances, cannot have any claim over those who fail under rule 9. Those who fall under rule 9 become eligible for promotion when they acquire qualification by passing the examination and that day should determine their eligibility in the matter of promotion. There is no question of re- adjustment as between persons of their class and persons who may be seniors to them but who passed he examinations subsequently beyond the specified period and specified chances. [2] Next comes the class of persons who have passed beyond specified period and specified chances. As between them, seniority will depend on the date of eligibility that in turn being the date of their acquiring the examination qualification. Therefore first they have to be ranked on that basis and thereafter adjustment has to be made by providing for seniors in the clerical cadre who have passed the examination later over their juniors in the same class subject to the rule that they would not get that seniority as against those juniors who have not only passed but have actually been promoted. In other words, though as between persons who fall under rule 7 seniority in the clerical cadre will be relevant for ranking for promotion to the post of Deputy Mamlatdar, that will be subject to the condition that juniors who had been actually promoted before their seniors became eligible will not SCA/603719/1986 4/5 JUDGMENT yield to seniors. Keeping in mind this rule The Deputy Mamlatdars belonging to the second class will have to be ranked for promotion and promotions affected earlier must be re-adjusted accordingly. [3] Then comes the third class of persons, those who have not passed the examination. Though they might have been promoted earlier and might have been continuing they would haven o claim to be in the list and, therefore, they need not be ranked and that is the class of persons whose reversion could be affected even before preparation of a final list. II. In the light of the aforesaid final directions, the petitions listed in categories, I, II, III and IV will have to be allowed to the limited extent as mentioned in this judgement, with no order as to costs. The concerned Collectors will have to arrange seniority in the case of Deputy Mamlatdars of the concerned petitioners and other eligible persons under their respective Collectorates in the light of these directions and having arranged seniority of the concerned employees accordingly, proper orders of reversion will have to be passed by the concerned authorities. III. The seniority of the concerned employees working as Deputy Mamlatdars and of those who are eligible to be promoted as Deputy Mamlatdars will have to be fixed by the concerned collectors for their respective collectorates in the light of the present decision, within a period of three months from the receipt of writ by respondent Government. It is clarified that with reference to the Deputy Mamlatdars whose cases are covered by final directions I (1) and (2), the status quo as existing today will have to be maintained till their inter-se seniority is SCA/603719/1986 5/5 JUDGMENT decided by the concerned Collectors in the light of this judgement. So far as Deputy Mamlatdars covered by third category envisaged by our directions 1(3) are concerned, it would be open to the concerned Collectors to revert them in accordance with law, if at all, any need for reversion of any Deputy Mamlatdar arises. 4. Rule is made absolute accordingly in Special Civil Application Nos.6037/1986, 6526/1986 and 2542/1987. No order as to costs. 5. For the reasons stated in the order dated 16th December 1983 in Special Civil Application No.2860/83 and other allied matters, rule is discharged in Special Civil Application No.1244 of 1987. No order as to costs. [K.S. JHAVERI, J.] ar