PRADEEP NAVINBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr. D. M. Devnani, learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives service of notice of Rule for the respondentState of Gujarat in some of the petitions and Mr.Vishal Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of Rule for the respondentState of Gujarat in the other petitions. Mr.D.G.Shukla, learned Advocate waives service of notice of Rule for the Gujarat Public Service Commission. In some petitions, the concerned Colleges have been added as parties. In spite of service of notices, they have not chosen to appear before this Court. Hence, there appears to be no necessity of issuing notices of Rule to them. In any event, they are formal parties and no action of theirs is under challenge. As the learned Assistant Government Pleaders are appearing for the State Government, their interest is adequately protected.

(2.) This group of petitions pertains to the challenge made by the petitioners, who have been appointed as adhoc Assistant Professors/Lecturers in Government Engineering Colleges and Government Polytechnics, to the termination of their services upon completion of eleven months of service. As almost identical issues of fact and law arise in all the petitions, they are being heard together and decided by a common judgment.

(3.) The factual matrix in which the petitions have been preferred is that, the Commissioner of Technical Education, issued an advertisement on his Website in the month of September, 2003, for filling up the vacant posts of Assistant Professors/Lecturers in Government Engineering Colleges and Government Polytechnics, on contractual basis, for a fixed period of eleven months or till regularly selected candidates by the Gujarat Public Service Commission ("GPSC", for short), are available, whichever is earlier. The petitioners applied for the said posts in Government Engineering Colleges and Government Polytechnics, across the State of Gujarat. As they possess the requisite qualifications for the said posts, they were appointed as Assistant Professors/Lecturers by issuing appointment orders of various dates. The appointment orders of the petitioners are identical in all cases and contain the same terms and conditions. The petitioners were appointed on a monthly salary of Rs.30,000/ in the cases of Assistant Professors in Government Engineering Colleges and Rs.25,000/ in the cases of Lecturers in Government Polytechnics. As per condition No.1 of the appointment letters, the period of appointment was for eleven months or till the availability of regularly selected candidates by the GPSC. In the present cases, the period of eleven months was to come to an end in the month of September, 2013. Apprehending the termination of their services and before the completion of the period of eleven months, the petitioners approached this Court by filing the present petitions. By an order dated 22.08.2013 passed in Special Civil Application No.13200/2013 and connected matters (and similar orders in other petitions), this Court, following thejudgment dated 07.09.2011 passed by the Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No.2986/2010 and allied matters, protected the petitioners by way of an adinterim arrangement to the effect that the service conditions of the petitioners would not be altered on the ground that their contract has come to an end. This arrangement was to continue till further orders. The Court also made it clear that this order would not confer any right upon the petitioners. It may be noted that during the pendency of the present petitions, the State Government issued a fresh advertisement on 15.08.2013, for recruitment to the posts of Assistant Professors/Lecturers in Government Engineering Colleges and Government Polytechnics, again for a period of eleven months, on terms and conditions identical to the cases of the petitioners before this Court.