IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 9296 of 2000 For Approval and Signature: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AKSHAY H.MEHTA ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? -------------------------------------------------------------- SOLANKI JASODOBEN MOHANLAL Versus DIRECTOR,OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF LIBRARY, -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Special Civil Application No. 9296 of 2000 MS SADHANA SAGAR for Petitioner No. 1 MR PRADIP D BHATE A.G.P. for Respondent No. 1 RULE SERVED for Respondent No. 2-3 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AKSHAY H.MEHTA Date of decision: 10/03/2004 ORAL JUDGEMENT In this petition the grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of the fact that she has been working on part time basis since 10th June, 1994, her service has not been regularized. 1.1. It appears from the record of the petition that she was appointed as part time sweeper on 10th June, 1994, in the office of respondent no. 3. It also appears that at regular period, she was given artificial breaks. She has been continued on the same basis even today as per the statement made at bar by Ms. Sadhna Sagar learned advocate for the petitioner. It appears that with effect from 2nd May, 2000, her working hours have been increased from three hours to six hours. 2. As against that, no affidavit has been filed by the other side and the averments made in the petition remain uncontroverted. 3. The question regarding regularization of service on temporary or part time employee who has put in number of years of service has been considered and decided by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 8917 of 1998 and its cognate matters by judgment dated 17th February, 2004. In view of the said judgment, this petition deserves to be allowed with the following directions :- The respondents are, therefore, now required to be directed that irrespective of the Circular of 21st August, 1995, they shall consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on permanent post in Class-IV and if the permanent posts are found vacant, she shall be appointed on the same in accordance with her claim, in the matter of seniority and the Regulations and if otherwise, she is not ineligible. Appointment should not be denied on the ground of overage or on the ground that it may amount to giving a back-door entry. This exercise is to be carried out as early as possible but in any case not later than 30th May, 2004. If need be, the petitioner can make appropriate representation, which will be considered in light of this judgment and in particular, the direction given therein. The petition is, therefore, partly allowed. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs. [AKSHAY H. MEHTA, J.] /phalguni/