LAWS(GJH)-2024-6-236

JADAV JITENDRASINH KARANSINH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On June 26, 2024
Jadav Jitendrasinh Karansinh Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admit. Mr. Sahil Trivedi, learned AGP waives service of notice of admission for respondent No.1 and Mr. Pradip J Patel, learned advocate waives service of notice of admission for respondent No.2 in Letters Patent Appeal No.852 of 2023. In Letters Patent Appeal No.853 of 2023 Mr. Sahil Trivedi, learned AGP waives service of notice of admission for respondent No.1 and Mr. T.R. Mishra, learned advocate waives notice of admission for respondent Nos. 2 to 25.

(2.) Both the appeals emanate from the oral judgment dtd. 6/12/2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in the captioned writ petition. Letters Patent Appeal No.852 of 2023 has been filed by the original petitioners - employees, wherein the learned Single Judge has refused to grant backwages, whereas Letters Patent Appeal No.853 of 2023 has been filed by the employer i.e. Chief District Health Officer challenging the order of the learned Single Judge, whereby directions are issued to the State Government to reinstate the employees.

(3.) At the outset, Mr.Pradip Patel, learned advocate appearing for the appellant - employer has submitted that the learned Single Judge has erred in issuing such directions since the judgments on which the reliance is placed while delivering the judgment will not apply in the case of the employees. He has submitted that the employees were appointed for a contractual basis in the year 2009 for 11 months and thereafter, their services were not extended and were ended on 28/2/2011. He has submitted that the employees assailed the order before this Court and out of 24 employees, only 09 have pursued the writ petition. It is submitted that during this period, in fact the appellant - employer undertook regular process for recruiting the Multipurpose Health Workers in the year 2011, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2022 and some of the petitioners/employees participated in such recruitment process but could not be selected. Thus, it is urged that the issue is squarely covered by the order dtd. 23/4/2024 passed by the co-ordinate Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No.1292 of 2023. Hence, it is urged that the order and directions issued by the learned Single Judge may be quashed and set aside.