JOINT SECRETARY Vs. SOLANKI SIDHDHARAJSINH KARANSINH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the appellants - original respondents authorities have challenged the oral order dtd. 30/9/2021 passed by learned Single Judge in captioned writ petition, by which, learned Single Judge has accepted the case of the original petitioner and directed the respondents authorities to regularize the service of the original petitioner and to give the benefits by quashing and setting aside the decision dtd. 26/9/2019, by which, the respondent authorities have refused to regularize the service of the original petitioner on the ground of not having outward number on the staff profile of the original petitioner.

(2.) Short facts arise from the record are as under:

(3.) Mr. Tirthraj Pandya, learned Assistant Government Pleader, by taking us through the Resolution dtd. 24/10/2017 issued by the Education Department of State Government, would submit that the Education Department, State Government has decided to separate the secondary and higher secondary sec. as a unit. Pursuant to which, a decision was also taken to regularize the service of such teachers, who were appointed by the School in Higher Secondary Sec. during its non-granted status. He would further submit that in this regard, only condition was imposed that for the purpose of regularization of such teachers, they should have passed TAT Examination and the District Education Officer should have sanctioned the staff profile. He would submit that the staff profile of the original petitioner does not contain the outward number, and therefore, the concerned authority was right in rejecting the case of the original petitioner. He would further submit that learned Single Judge ought not to have relied upon the fact that the concerned authority had verified the signature of District Education Officer on staff profile of the original petitioner. He would further submit that the order passed by learned Single Judge has been complied with by the concerned authority however, subject to outcome of the present appeal. He, therefore, would submit that the present appeal may be allowed.