PRAKASHKUMAR PRAHLADBHAI PATEL Vs. DISTRICT PRIMARTY EDUCATION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By a very elaborate order of reference, the learned Single Judge has referred the following question for consideration of a larger bench:

(2.) The background of the reference may briefly be noted. The District Primary Education Officer of the District Panchayat, Ahmedabad invited applications by an advertisement dated 19.9.1994 published in the newspapers dated 22.9.1994 and 26.9.1994 for making recruitment to the post of primary teachers. Recruitment to the said post is governed by the Rules known as "The Gujarat Panchayat Service (Recruitment of Primary Teachers) Rules, 1970 which have been framed in exercise of the powers conferred on the State Government by the provisions of Section 323 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961. The petitioners had applied for the post in response to the said advertisement and were called for interview. There were guidelines laid down under the Circular dated 7.8.1989 for the purpose of the selection process. As per those guidelines, merit list was to be prepared on the basis of the marks obtained at the S.S.C. and P.T.C. Examinations and, in addition, there was also a reference made to special qualifications in the subjects of music, drawing, physical education, Hindi and tailoring in respect of which additional two marks for each of the subjects were to be given if the requisite certificate showing proficiency in the concerned subject was obtained. In the advertisement inviting applications it was mentioned that the applications should be submitted by the candidates within 15 days of the advertisement alongwith the requisite documents showing qualifications including in respect of the above additional subjects. The applications were to be made in the prescribed form in which admittedly there was a reference to these additional subjects. According to the learned counsel for these petitioners, as on the date of the interview, all the candidates had already acquired certificates in the additional subject of tailoring and, therefore, they were entitled to two marks each on that count.

(3.) The learned Single Judge took note of the fact that in all these cases the requisite certificates showing proficiency in the additional subject were obtained after the last date of the receipt of their applications pursuant to the advertisement. Reliance was placed before the learned Single Judge on an earlier decision of a Single Judge of this Court in MANISHABEN SHANKAR LAL PATEL v. DISTRICT PRIMARY EDUCATION OFFICER and OTHERS reported in 1995 (2) GCD 318 to point out that a view was already taken that even if the result of such additional subject was declared after the last date for the receipt of applications, the candidate was to be given the benefit of two additional marks. In MANISHABEN's case (supra), the learned Single Judge had on 1st April, 1995 held that the petitioner was entitled to get the weightage of additional qualification which was acquired before the date of interview but after the last date of making the application for the post of primary teacher. In the referring order, the observations from MANISHABEN's case have been copiously quoted.