PATEL RAVINDRAKUMAR RANCHHODBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Mr. Gaurav Chudasama for the petitioner and learned AGP for the respondent No.1 - State. Perused the record. The petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents that if there would be vacant post within two years in the parent school of the petitioner or pay center or in taluka or in nearby taluka then the petitioner may be given benefit of such vacant posts and he may be absorbed in the said vacant posts if it is available.

(2.) It is further submitted that pursuant to retirement of one teacher on 31.5.2017 from the parent school of the petitioner, now, he may be accommodated in that school and for the purpose, he may be called in the camp to be held in the month of June, 2017. It is disclosed that such camp is held today itself.

(3.) I do not find any reason or substance in the petition so as to grant interim relief in favour of the petitioner. If at all petitioner is entitled to any benefit as per G.R. dated 23.5.2012, then certainly he will get benefit of such G.R. Therefore, he cannot plead and select that in a given circumstance, he may be given particular treatment only because he has been repatriated from the post of CRC/BRC. It goes without saying that at initial stage, deputation of CRC/BRC was based upon their consent and now, once they are repatriated, they are equal to other teachers and cannot be entitled to any interpretation of any G.R. in their favour.