(1.) By way of present petition, the petitioner has challenged the illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory action on the part of the respondent authorities of not considering the case of the petitioner for placement at an appropriate place in the seniority list.
(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that, he was appointed as unarmed police sub-inspector in response to the advertisement issued by the respondent authority. He had participated at various stages of recruitment process and thus, pursuant to the regular selection process undertaken by the Gujarat Police Recruitment Board, the petitioner came to be selected for appointment to the post of unarmed police sub- inspector. In the said select list, the petitioner was placed at merit rank No.205 and appointment letter was also issued on 20.11.2010.
(3.) It is vehemently submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner that there is a provision in Rule 61(10) of the Gujarat Police Manual as to how to consider the leaves availed by a police sub- inspector, which are not considered in the present case. It is contended that as per the said Rules, the seniority of direct recruit police sub-inspector is determined by the order of merit in which they pass- out from the police training school. It is further contended that the respondent authority had published the provisional seniority list of the cadre of unarmed police sub-inspector on 28.08.2017, where the name of the petitioner was reflected at sr. no. 5085. According to the learned advocate for the petitioner his name should be reflected in seniority list at sr. no.4446 and for that he had made various representations. A detailed representation was submitted on 13.09.2017. However, the said representation was rejected. It is vehemently contended that other persons similarly situated and having enjoyed same type of leave are given different type of treatment, while the present petitioner is singled out by the respondent authority and therefore, the petitioner is before this Court challenging the same.