BHATT VISHAL SURESHBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr.Nirad D. Buch, learned advocate for the petitioners, Mr.Swapneshwar Goutam, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 3 authorities.

(2.) BY way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:

(3.) IT is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners came to be appointed on contractual basis for a period of 18 months pursuant to advertisement (at Annexure -B to the petition) issued by State of Gujarat, Urban Development and Urban Housing Department. It is further the case of the petitioners by further order/advertisement dated 18.11.2011 the same came to be extended. The petitioners have challenged fresh advertisement 18.11.2011 for filling up various vacancies of Municipal Accounts Officer (Class -II and Class -III) as well as Municipal Engineers in various municipalities in the State of Gujarat. It is the case of the petitioners that the said advertisement does not provide for any age relaxation and, therefore, the same is illegal, arbitrary, bad in law and violative of right to equality of opportunity on various grounds which are set out in the petition.