YOGESH RAMECHCHANDRA SHAH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short facts of the case are that the petitioners are the employees, who have been appointed during the period from 1988 to 1992, which is the period during which the management was given by the State Government to respondent No.2 Trust. It is the case of the petitioners that as per the Government Resolution dated 20-12-1986, on experimental basis the management of the T.B. Sanatorium, which was with the Government was given to respondent No.2 Trust and the said Sanatorium was to be provided with 100% grant by the Government. It is also the case of the petitioners that as per condition No.14, the present existing staff was to be continued on deputation. However, if any staff is not to be taken, then he shall be absorbed in the Government. It was also made clear that if any new recruitment is to be made, the same shall be as per the recruitment rules of the Government and for such purpose Staff Selection Board shall be constituted and the recruitment shall be made. Clause-16 of the said Resolution provides that as and when the management is taken back by the Government, the appointment made of the staff as per Clause-14 shall be absorbed in the State Government and no staff shall be retrenched from service. It is further the case of the petitioners that thereafter in the year 1993, as per the Resolution dated 6-10-1993, the State government has taken decision of taking back the management of the said T.B.Sanatorium from the Trust and the petitioners were not allowed to join duties on their respective posts and under these circumstances, the petitioners had to prefer this petition for appropriate writ to quash and set aside the action of the respondents of not permitting the petitioners to discharge duties and seeking termination of the services of the petitioners.

(2.) On behalf of the respondent State Government, Mr.R.G.Patel, Administrative Officer has filed the affidavit-in-reply and it has been contended that the Government, after the Resolution dated 6-10-1993, has further passed the Resolution dated 14-12-1993, whereby it is decided to absorb the employees, with reference to conditions No.14 and No.16 of the earlier Resolution dated 20-12-1986, who have completed minimum two years of service and such recruitment should have been as per the recruitment rules of the Government and at the time of appointment, the person should also fulfill the criteria of age prescription. It has also been submitted that so far as petitioner No.1 is concerned the appointment is not by the Staff Selection Board. So far as petitioner No.2 is concerned, it has been submitted that the petitioner has not completed minimum two years of service. So far as petitioner No.4 is concerned, it has been submitted that he was over-aged. So far as petitioners No.6 to 9 are concerned, it has been contended that the appointment is not made as per the recommendation of the Staff Selection Board and it is further submitted that it cannot be asserted as of right by the petitioners that they should be absorbed in the Government.

(3.) On behalf of respondent No.2 Trust, no affidavit-in-reply has been filed. However, Mr.Dave, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2, has submitted that the prayers are, in substance, against the Government and, therefore, no affidavit is filed. It is also submitted by him that as such the Trust was managing the affairs pursuant to the Government Resolution on and behalf of the Government and, therefore, the petitioners cannot be said to be employees of the Trust and since the management was only given to the Trust and the Trust was managing the affairs pursuant to the Government Resolution dated 20-12-1986, at the time when the management is taken back it should be with all employees.