SCA/3036/2007 1/2 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3036 of 2007 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD ========================================= = 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 ? ========================================= = RITAMBEN MADHUSUDAN THAKKAR Versus THE SECRETARY AND OTHERS ========================================= =Appearance : MR.RAJESH B SONI for the Petitioner NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 - 3, 5, RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1 - 4. MR DN KIRATSATA for Respondent(s) : 1, SERVED BY RPAD - (N) for Respondent(s) : 4, MR HK MAKWANA, ASSTT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent No.5 RULE NOT RECD BACK for Respondent(s) : 5, ========================================= = CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD Date : 17/03/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. This is held by this Court that the appointment of the petitioner is not according to the Rules is illegal. This was so held by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ritamben Madhusudan Thakkar Vs Secretary, North Gujarat Yuvak SCA/3036/2007 2/2 JUDGMENT Mandal and others, in Letters Patent Appeal No.611 of 2007 in Special Civil Application No.9233 of 2006.. Once the appointment of the petitioner is held illegal then right of continuance, if denied by the Tribunal, cannot be said to be an exercise of the jurisdiction, which can be held to be illegal. From the admitted facts on the record, the petitioner has never faced any selection. Her appointment was absolutely temporary. Such is also held against the petitioner in earlier litigation. In the background, if the Tribunal has not held in favour of the petitioner then no illegality is seen in the order of the Tribunal. The order of the Tribunal is, thus, in accordance with law. The petition has no force. The petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. (BHAGWATI PRASAD, J.) omkar