LAWS(GJH)-2010-5-262

NAYEE MUKESH AMRUTBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On May 10, 2010
NAYEE MUKESH AMRUTBHAI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :-

(2.) The short facts of the case are that pursuant to the advertisement published by the respondent inviting application for the post of Vidhyasahayak, the petitioner applied for the same. On 19.12.1999, the petitioner was called for the interview for the post of Talim Bhavan, Jamnagar by respondent no. 3. The petitioner attended the said interview and thereafter the petitioner was selected as Vidhyasahayak. On 11.01.2000 respondent no. 3 informed the petitioner to remain present in the camp organized for place selection on 21.01.2000. The petitioner attended the said camp for place selection on 21.01.2000. However, at that time, the list was affixed on the Notice Board showing the names of candidates whose names are deleted and amongst the same, the name of the the petitioner was also there. Thereafter, the petitioner made several correspondence to the respondent to do the needful in the matter. However, no heed was taken to his request, the petitioner sent a Notice through his Advocate to respondent nos. 2 & 3. It is the case of the petitioner that till date no reply is given to the request made by the petitioner. Hence, this petition.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. It is true that the petitioner was called on 19/12/1999. However, the reason for calling the petitioner was to check the original certificates and not to select him to the post of Vidhyasahayak. Further, it appears from the record that the petitioner belongs to Baxi-panch and the minimum percentage required for the candidate of Baxi-panch is 57.55%, which the petitioner does not possess. Looking to the facts of the case, I am of the view that the petitioner does not possess the required percentage required for the post of Vidhyasahayak. Hence, no illegality or infirmity is committed by the respondent, as the petitioner was not fulfilling the minimum requirement for the said post.