A M PARMAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The two petitioners are serving in the State of Gujarat-Respondent No. 1 herein - as Assistant Conservators of Forests. They belong to Scheduled Castes. They were selected by the Gujarat Public Service Commission and their names were recommended for appointment to the posts of Assistant Conservators of Forests Thereafter they were sent for training in the State Forest Service College Dehradun for attending training course that was conducted during the years 1985-87 (from 1-4-1985 to 31-3-1987). They successfully completed the course and they passed the examination taken by the State Forest Service College in March 1987 The result of the said examination was declared on 31 1987 As stated in the petition after the petitioners were declared successful at the aforesaid examination they on April 4 1987 reported for duty to the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests Vadodara. Government of Gujarat by its resolution dated October 14 1987 created 16 supernumerary posts of Assistant Conservators of Forests and by the order dated October 19 1987 the petitioners were appointed as assistant Conservators of Forests. The appointment order dated October 19 1987 inter alia stated that the petitioners were appointed on the supernumerary posts created by the Government and the services of the petitioners rendered by them on such supernumerary posts shall not be counted towards their seniority. However their services for seniority will be counted only from the date they get regular appointment on the post of Assistant Conservator of forests. At the time the petitioners came to be appointed on the aforesaid posts they were required to give an undertaking that they agree to accept the appointment on the aforesaid term and condition viz that the services rendered by them on the supernumerary posts shall not count towards their seniority. Accordingly the petitioners while accepting the appointment under the order dated October 19 1987 gave such undertakings. The aforesaid appointment order dated October 19 1987 is at Annexure-C to the petition. According to the petitioners after they joined services as Assistant Conservator of forests under the appointment order dated October 19 1987 they have passed the prescribed departmental examinations in June 1990 According to the petitioners they have thus performed the services as Assistant Conservator of Forests for the period from April 1 1985 till the dated of filing of the present petition. I mention here this petition came to be filed on July 27 1983 It is the case of the petitioners that therefore they have put in the more that 8 years in service as assistant Conservator of Forests. In para 3.4 of the petition the petitioners have referred to the Deputy Conservator of Forests (Gujarat forest Service) Recruitment rules 1987 (for short Recruitment Rules). Than in that paragraph they had also referred to the Government policy of reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes even in the matter of promotion as spelt out in the Government Resolution dated january 31 1976 According to the petitioners even though in the matter of promotion the reservation policy has been adopted by Government of Gujarat under the government Resolution dated January 31 1976 till 1987 none of the candidates belonging to the reserved category i.e. Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes was promoted (to the post of Deputy Conservator of Forests.) The petitioners have then referred to the promotion to the post of Deputy Conservator of Forests (for Short hereinafter referred to as DCF) given to Shri M. V. Parmar Shri I. A. Chauhan and Shri N. L. Desai in November 1991 under the High Courts orders. The petitioners ever that even after grtanting promotions to the post of DCF to Shri M. V. Parmar Shri I. A. Chauhan and Shri N. L. Desai there still remained backlog of one post which ought to go to the Scheduled Castes candidate but that was not filled in. Then the petitioners have referred to the Special Civil Application filed by Shri S. M. Dubey and Shri H. K. Patal working as Assistant Conservators of Forests (for short ACF) for fixation of seniority of the direct recruits vis-a-vis the promotees. From that petition being Special Civil Application No. 896 of 1991 arose Letters Patent Appeals No. 195 and 196 of 1993 wherein Civil Application No. 880 of 1983 was filled and in that Civil Application the Letters Patent Bench of this Court permitted the State Government to promote 18 persons as DCF from amongst the ACFs who are of proved merit and efficiency and who have put in at least 8 years of service including their training period in the Forests Training College. By that order the court also made it clear that the selection is not to be made only on the basis of any seniority list and the appointment (on the promotional post) shall be purely ad hoc and temporary and subject of the further order that may be passed by the Court in the aforesaid Letters Patent Appeals. Thus under the orders passed by this Court in C.A. No. 880 of 1993 referred to hereinabove the State Government was permitted to promoted 18 persons as DCFs from amongst the ACFs having proved merit and efficiency and who have put in at least 8 years of service including the training period and those promotions were not to be made only on the basis of purely ad hoc and temporary and subject to the further orders that might come to be passed by the court in the aforesaid Letters Patent Appeals. According to the petitioner the State Government is going to effect promotions of 18 ACFs and according to them in such promotions also the reservation ratio should be applicable and applying such ratio two more posts are required to be filled in by implementing the reservation policy granting promotions to the Scheduled Castes ACFs and as the petitioners belong to the Scheduled Castes they are in line for promotion. It is the grievance of the petitioners that their inquiry has revealed that the Respondents State is not giving effect to 18 ACFs to the posts DCFs though is backlog.

(2.) Thus the petitioner in this petition challenge the so called inaction on the part of the State Government in not following the reservation Policy and in not considering the petitioners for promotion to the posts of DCFs when the State is permitted by the Court to effect promotion of 18 ACFs to the posts of DCFs as violative of the constitutional guarantees and reservation policy.

(3.) On the aforesaid contentions the petitioners in the petition prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction or order directing the Respondents-State to consider their claim for promotion to the post of DCFs alongwith the consideration of the cases for promotion as per the interim order made by this Court in Civil Application No. 880 of 1993 in the above referred Letters Patent Appeals.