PATEL CHANDRIKABEN GOKALDAS Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners who were working as primary teachers have challenged Clause- 7 of Chapter-H of the New Transfer Policy of the State dtd. 1/4/2022. According to the petitioners, the policy to the extent which provides that as and when the deputation period of Block Resource Clusters BRC/CRC/URC are over and when their time for repatriation comes, the clause provides that they shall be repatriated to their mother school and their initial seniority shall be counted from the date of their being in that mother school, is not only bad on count of the principle of legitimate expectation, promissory estoppel, that it is unreasonable, and that it is retrospective in operation.

(2.) The group of petitions was argued irrespective of individual facts in each petition by the learned counsels for the respective parties, inasmuch as, there was a consensus that irrespective of the facts of each individual case, arguments would be confined to the validity of Clause-7 of Chapter-H of the Policy of Transfer dtd. 1/4/2022.

(3.) The learned counsels for the petitioners who have argued at length for the petitioners are Mr.Shalin Mehta, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms.Shikha Panchal, Mr.Gaurav Chudasama and Mr.P.P,Majmudar, learned counsel for the respective parties. For the State arguments have been advanced by Ms.Manisha Lavkumar Shah, learned Government Pleader assisted by Ms. Shruti Pathak, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State and also by Mr.Utkarsh Sharma, learned AGP.