HANSABEN PRATAPSINH BARIA Vs. GOHIL PRITHVIRAJSINH SURENDRASINH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants were the original respondents Nos.7 and 9 and the respondents Nos.1 and 2 were the original petitioners in Special Civil Application No.15903 of 2013 which has been decided by the learned Single Judge vide judgment and order dated 16.7.2014 allowing the writ petition of the present respondents Nos.1 and 2 and, therefore, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said decision, present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the appellants.

(2.) In the present appeal the appellants have prayed in para ?4 as under : ?

(3.) It is the case of the appellants that Forest Department of the State of Gujarat issued an advertisement dated 27.8.2012 for the recruitment of posts of Vanrakshak Sahayak, Class ?III (Beat Guard) for total vacancy of 527 posts. Out of the said posts, 38 posts were allotted to Narmada District. Out of those 38 posts, 14 posts were reserved for Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and Socially and Economically Backward Class candidates. As per the Government Notification, 30% posts are required to be reserved for women candidates in each category. After the calculation and considering the Government Notification, appointments were given to the appellants on the post of Vanrakshak Sahayak, Class ?III (Beat Guard). While they were in service, respondents Nos.1 and 2 filed Special Civil Application No.15903 of 2013 before this Court in which it had been contended by the respondents Nos.1 and 2 that the calculation for the post of women reservation is not made properly as per the Government Notification. It was also contended by the respondents Nos.1 and 2 in the above mentioned Special Civil Application that they are on the higher side in the merit list, even though they were not appointed for the above posts and present appellants were appointed on the post of Vanrakshak Sahayak, Class ?III (Beat Guard) in the women quota by erroneous calculation. The learned Single Judge after considering the arguments advanced by both the sides and judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court as well as this Court and Government Notification etc., came to the conclusion that the appellants herein are appointed on the basis of erroneous calculation and the respondents Nos.1 and 2 herein are on the higher side in the merit list and, therefore, they are entitled for appointment on the said posts. In view of the judgment and order passed in Special Civil Application No.15903 of 2013, the concerned authority has cancelled the appointment of present appellants. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said decision passed in Special Civil Application No.15903 of 2013 the present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed.