STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. T J PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This group of 102 petitions is filed by the State of Gujarat against orders passed by the Gujarat Civil Services Tribunal in Appeal Nos. 439 of 1982 and others on 13/10/1983 and also against an order passed in Review Application No. 7 of 1984, on 31/05/1984.

(2.) To appreciate the controversy in question, few facts may now be stated. The respondent in each petition was selected by the Gujarat Public Service Commission (GPSC for short) for the post of Clerk in Secretariat Department and other offices at Ahmedabad. The Recruitment Rules for the purpose of appointment to the post of Clerks in Lower Division of Subordinate Secretariat Service have been framed under the proviso to Art. 309 of the Constitution of India on 14/06/1966. The relevant rules are Rules 1 and 2 and they read as under :

(3.) More than 100 employees of the State Government approached the Gujarat Civil Services Tribunal by filing appeals for various reliefs inter alia contending that after they were selected by the GPSC for the posts of Clerks in Secretariate Department and other offices at Ahmedabad, they were required to take training and after passing the post-training examination they were required to be appointed as regular clerks in the Departments of the Secretariate and other offices. Ordinarily, after the selection by the GPSC, such Candidates were to be given training and only after the post-training examination and declaration of the result of the said examination, they were to be appointed as Clerks. However, in view of the administrative exigencies at the relevant point of time the General Administration Department (GAD for short), decided to appoint them as untrained temporary Clerks and before they were given training and before they could clear the examination, they were appointed as supernumerary Clerks. During the period of training and upto the date of the result of the examination, the candidates were to be paid a fixed amount of Rs. 250/- by way of stipend in view of the fact that they were not to be appointed to the post of Clerk. But if a regular appointment is made to the post of Clerk, such candidate would be entitled to get regular pay scales. It was the case of the appellants before the Tribunal that in view of the fact that the GAD wanted services of the appellants even prior to sending them for training and declaration of the result of departmental examination, they were appointed as supernumerary clerks and they were paid salary for the said period. In due course, they were sent for training for a period of two months (1 1/2 month for the theoretical training and for 1/2 month practical training), they appeared for the post-training examination and all of them had successfully cleared the said examination. However, during the period of training of two months as well as till the result of the examination was declared the appellants were paid only Rs. 250.00 per month by way of stipend. The said action was clearly illegal, ultra vires and unconstitutional and was required to be interfered with. It was also submitted by the appellants before the Tribunal that since they were appointed as supernumerary Clerks after they had cleared the GPSC before the training as well as post-training examination, their seniority was required to be considered in the light of the original appointment as supernumerary Clerks and the action of the respondent-State Government in ignoring their seniority till they came to be regularly appointed for the first time after the declaration of the result was also contrary to law.