STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. YOTISHCHANDRA INDURAI ANTANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admit. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties the appeal as well as the Special Civil Application were taken up for final hearing and both are being disposed of by this judgment.

(2.) The first respondent in the appeal/original petitioner in Special Civil Application (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner), who was serving as Assistant Charity Commissioner, was promoted as Deputy Charity Commissioner vide order dated May 4, 1995 passed by the State Government on the basis of the petitioner's service record for the last three years. The promotion was on temporary basis and subject to approval by the Gujarat Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the GPSC ). While considering the case of the petitioner, the GPSC examined the service record of the petitioner for the last five years and found that there were certain adverse entries in the service record for the petitioner for the last five years and found that there were certain adverse entries in the service record for the year 1990-91 and the same were not taken into account by the Government while giving the petitioner temporary promotion as per the above order. On account of the said adverse entries the GPSC did not recommend the case of the petitioner for promotion. On the basis of the non-approval of the case of the petitioner the State Government passed the impugned order dated September 21, 1996 reverting the petitioner from the post of Deputy Charity Commissioner to that of the Assistant Charity Commissioner.

(3.) The aforesaid reversion order came to be challenged by the petitioner in the in Special Civil Application No. 7296/96. The learned single Judge was pleased to admit the petition and pass an interim order staying the operation of the impugned order till the final hearing of the petition. The ground that appealed to the learned single Judge was to the effect that since the adverse entries in question were never communicated to the petitioner, the Government was jujstified in not taking into consideration the same and the GPSC had erred in taking the said adverse entries into consideration. The adverse remarks in question were shown to the court.