BHAVNEETA RAJESHKUMAR DARJI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Nine petitions captioned above were heard together and are treated for disposal by this common judgment as they constitute a group, involving similar facts and identical issues.

(2.) The petitioners were the aspirants for appointment to the post of Assistant Public Prosecutor. Having fared unsuccessful in the recruitment process by unable to meet with the qualifying criteria for selection, they filed the present petitions seeking to set aside the declaration of result by the respondent Gujarat Public Service Commission, as also to get set aside the consequential steps including the preparation of final selection list. The further prayer made was to declare that the prescription of minimum qualifying marks in the viva voce test was illegal. The petitioners want themselves to be considered as duly selected candidates for the appointment to the posts.

(3.) Detailing of relevant fats of the case necessarily reflects on the important aspects of the dispute, and often implicitly responds to the contentions in the controversy. The facts, therefore, may be stated. The Gujarat Public Service Commission (GPSC) issued advertisement on 12th February, 2014 inviting applications for recruitment to 554 posts of Assistant Public Prosecutor, Class II. Looking at the figures of the category-wise posts to be filled in, total posts in General Category were 288 out of which 86 posts were for women. 39 posts were in Scheduled Caste category inclusive of 12 for women of that category. For Scheduled Tribe category there were 78 posts and out of them, 23 were for women. 149 posts inclusive 45 for women were for Socially and Educationally Backward Class. Amongst the total posts, there was also reservation provided for physically handicapped and Ex-servicemen.