RAJJABHUSEN SAKHTSINH VASAVA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) THE petitioner has preferred this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction, to quash and set aside order dated 10-6-2010 and to issue directions to the respondents to appoint the petitioner to the post of Revenue Talati (Class-III), as per order dated 20th March,2010.

(3.) THE petition has been strongly opposed by Mr.Maulik G.Nanavati, learned Assistant Government Pleader by submitting that the original application Form of the petitioner clearly indicates that the petitioner has tick-marked at two places against the categories of Scheduled Tribe and Socially and Educationally Backward Class. It is contended that paragraph 9(15) of the advertisement stipulates that an application form which is defective, shall be rejected at any stage, if it is found, upon verification, that there is a discrepancy in the details filled in by the candidate. Further, in clause (3) of the Interview Call Letter dated 20-3-2010 it is mentioned that, if the application Form of the candidate is incomplete or defective in respect of the details filled in by the candidate, the selection of said candidate shall stand cancelled and the name of such candidate shall be deleted from the provisional appointment list by considering the candidate to be ineligible. That in the present case as the petitioner has clearly tick-marked two categories, his application Form has been found to be defective and his candidature has been rightly cancelled by respondent No.2. It is further contended by the learned Assistant Government Pleader that in the representation made by the petitioner, it is stated that there is a possibility that somebody might have played mischief with the application Form of the petitioner, in a malafide manner. However, the said contention is vague and unsupported by any cogent material. Accordingly, it is urged by the learned Assistant Government Pleader that the petition be dismissed.