MAYANK P ACHARYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Mr.Maulik G. Nanavati, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of RULE on behalf of respondents. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and with the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, the petition is being heard and finally decided, today.

(2.) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed, inter-alia, with a prayer to promote the petitioner as Professor of Ophthalmology with effect from 30.08.2001, by giving a deemed date of promotion.

(3.) MR.Maulik G. Nanavati, learned Assistant Government Pleader has submitted that the substantive appointment of the petitioner is in the cadre of Assistant Professor of Ophthalmology, and his appointment as Associate Professor by order dated 19.08.1997 was purely on an ad-hoc/temporary basis. The petitioner has never been regularly promoted as Associate Professor of Ophthalmology. When the Departmental Promotion Committee constituted for considering the candidature of the candidates for promotion to the post of Associate Professor, met on 30.08.2001, the name of the petitioner was considered. However, as there were adverse remarks against the petitioner for the period under consideration, the said Committee did not consider him fit for promotion whereas, the juniors of the petitioner were found fit for promotion as Associate Professors, and were so promoted. As the petitioner has not been promoted as Associate Professor on a regular basis, he cannot be considered for regular promotion to the post of Professor, straightaway. It is further submitted that due to an order passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No.13294/2004, the petitioner was offered appointment as Professor of Ophthalmology on purely temporary/ ad-hoc basis for a limited period of six months, or till the post is filled on a regular basis, or further orders are passed. However, the petitioner did not choose to take this appointment, therefore, no right accrues to him on this count. On the strength of the above submissions, it is prayed that the petition be dismissed.