NAVENDUKUMAR HARSHADBHAI BRAHMBHATT Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition is moved to get the order of termination set aside. The petitioner joined the service of Agriculture produce Market Committee as clerk when his father was the Chairman of the committee. Admittedly, it was only an application moved by the petitioner to his father that the order of appointment was made.

(2.) NO public notice or any kind of advertisement was issued calling public at large to compete for the post. This speaks of bias inherent in the selection because father was the Chairman and son was the applicant.

(3.) THERE are Rules of the Committee which require that for any appointment to be made, public notice is necessary. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the Committee there are employees employed who are relations of the chairman/member of the Board. This speaks of sorry state of affairs happening in the Market Committee which is required to be dealt with sternly and an obvious instance has come to this Court that the chairman of the Market Committee has appointed his son as clerk of the Committee and this Court has observed that no procedure as prescribed in the Rules has been followed. The Court is required to sternly observe that such practice should henceforth be stopped and all offers of public employment should be made to the public at large. No direct recruitment be made from the category of relations of the members/chairman of the Market committee without observing the procedure prescribed by law. All such appointments should be put to the public by a public notice or an advertisement so that unbiased selection can take place. In that background, this petition is not liable to be entertained against an order which sets aside an illegal order. This is settled law that an order peipetuating illegality is not passed by a Court.