NIRULATTABEN G BHATT Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) When the matter was called out in the first session, nobody was present. Even in the second half non is present.

(2.) The present petition is filed by the petitioner, who joined as Paniwala Bai in the Class IV cadre under respondent authorities on 17.3.1983 and was working at Fatehpura Kumar Shala, Vadodara. It is the case of the petitioner that she had applied for the post of Tailoring Teacher against various advertisements, the details of which are set out in para 2 of the petition, such as, @@@ Date of advertisement Date of application 06.12.1979 13.12.1979 06.05.1983 09.05.1983 19.05.1984 23.05.1984 06.12.1985 16.12.1985 30.07.1986 07.08.1986 It is the case of the petitioner that she was not even called for interview for the reasons best known to the respondents. That besides the applications mentioned in para 2 of the petition, she had also sent reminders to the authorities with copies of certificates, etc. It is also her case that she had also applied for promotion as Clerk on various dates, the details of which are set out in the same para 2 of the petition, which reads as under :

(3.) It is surprising that the present petition came to be filed only in the year 1991 (it was affirmed on 2.10.1991) and relief sought for in the petition is that the petitioner should be considered for appointment/ promotion as a Tailoring Teacher by the respondent from the date of her first application, i.e. 9.5.1983 and to pay difference of salary as per the scale she is entitled to as Tailoring Teacher within a stipulated time. The petitioner has further prayed that the advertisement which is published on 18.8.1991 be declared illegal, null and void and the same be quashed and set aside as the same is, according to the petitioner, violative of the guidelines given by the Govt. of Gujarat by various Resolutions and hence it is illegal and unconstitutional. It is also her case that the advertisement published (18.8.1991) is beyond the scope of the Resolutions of the Govt. of Gujarat. Therefore, the same is illegal, unconstitutional, null and void. The petitioner has also set out in para 5 of the petition cases of two persons who were appointed as Tailoring Teacher in 1981 and 1986 respectively. The petitioner tried to base her claim on the ground that these two teachers were having same qualifications like the petitioner, namely, SSC Pass and Tailoring Course in Women & Children Garments (TCWCG) and therefore, she is also qualified to be appointed on the post. The petitioner also gave the name of one Manoramaben C. Shah who was also possessing qualification of SSC and TCWCG, and was appointed as Tailoring Teacher in 1981.