JITESH KANTILAL KANADIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This group of petitions, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, raising identical issues of facts and law, resultantly, is requested to be dealt with by present common judgment and order, as a result of this, Special Civil Application No.14987 of 2018 is treated as a lead matter, wherein following reliefs have been claimed by the petitioner:

(2.) The facts involved in this lead matter are that the petitioner is holding a Degree in B.Sc. with distinction, M.Sc. with First Class and B.Ed. with distinction and having work experience as mentioned in para 3 of the petition. On 18.1.2012, Education Department, Gandhinagar, had issued a notification for regulating the recruitment of the Head Teachers, Class-III in subordinate services of Directorate of Primary Education or respective district or Municipal Primary Education Committee, pursuant to the rules known as Head Teachers Class-III in Subordinate Services of Directorate of Primary Education or respective district or Municipal Primary Education Committee Recruitment Rules, 2012. By virtue of Government Resolution dated 27.8.2012, the benefits were to be provided to the Head Teachers appointed by direct recruitment through District Education Committee/Municipal Education Committee. On 12.2.2014, a public advertisement was issued for filling up 285 vacant posts in Gujarat Educational Service, Class-II(Administrative Branch) wherein, according to the petitioner, upper age limit was prescribed as 36 years and in response to this advertisement, on-line application was submitted by the petitioner with necessary details. On 1.6.2014, a preliminary test was conducted and on 10.9.2014, the result of preliminary test was declared in which the petitioner was declared as pass. On 3.8.2016, respondent No.3 declared a list after carrying out scrutiny of documents in which also, the petitioner's name was placed at Sr.No.631 bearing Seat No.101018457 but with a remark of "over-age". As a result of this, the petitioner could not appear in the oral interview to be held in September, 2016. Feeling aggrieved by the said decision of treating the petitioner as over-age, the petitioner has invoked extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court by raising multiple contentions. The prime contention appears to have been raised is that by not treating the Head Teachers appointed in Municipal Schools covered under the Municipal Corporation at par with the Head Teachers appointed in district panchayat, the respondent authority has deprived the candidates including the petitioner of the benefits admissible to the Head Teachers appointed under the district panchayat especially in respect of age relaxation.

(3.) The Court based upon this prime contention issued notice on 7.9.2016 and thereafter it has come up for consideration finally on 5.2.2019 in which learned Senior Advocate, Mr. Shalin Mehta for Mr. Hemang M. Shah, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners has vehemently contended that there appears to be a hostile discrimination in not extending the benefits as are made available to other sets of employees which is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It has been submitted that the petitioners are also having similar kind of experience, discharging similar kind of work and only distinction is that the petitioners happened to be Head Teachers of Nagar Palika schools. It has been submitted that the distinction which is tried to be made by the said authority in not extending the benefit simply because the petitioners happened to be the employees of Nagar Palika school is nothing but a clear example of arbitrary and discriminatory exercise of powers. It has been submitted that these employees appointed in Nagar Palika schools are to be treated at par with Head Teachers appointed under the District Panchayat and, therefore, whatever benefits available to the Head Teachers of the District Panchayat especially in respect of age relaxation should be extended to the present petitioners since they are working in Nagar Palika schools. It has further been contended that examination of selection of Head Teachers in District Panchayat and Nagar Palika schools is conducted by the State Examination Board and the selection is carried out by the Gujarat State Primary Education Selection Committee and, therefore, when the body of taking examination and the selection is the same, then there shall not be any distinction between the Head Teachers, who are appointed under District Panchayat and those appointed under Nagar Palika schools. It has further been contended that the schools which are run by District Panchayat are receiving 100% grant from the State Government whereas State Government allocates 80% grant in the Municipal Schools and the remaining amount is allocated by the Municipal Corporation from the taxes which are being collected and, therefore, major portion of grant is made available to Municipal Schools by State Government and, therefore, the benefit of age relaxation deserves to be granted to the petitioners as well. It has further been contended that the Head Teachers appointed under the school of Municipal Corporation are getting similar benefits with respect to higher pay scale as well as with respect to leave rules etc. and as such, they are to be treated at par with Head Teachers appointed under District Panchayat, resultantly, the age relaxation benefit must be given. It has been submitted that simply because the employees of Municipal Schools are being paid salary out of the municipal fund, that would not create a different class by virtue of which the petitioners can be discriminated and by submitting this, a request is made to extend the benefit of age relaxation and thereby to set aside the decision of not extending the benefit of age relaxation. Learned advocate has further submitted that except this issue of overage, the petitioners are fulfilling every eligibility criteria prescribed for the appointment and, therefore, in view of the fact that there is a substantial control of the Government over the Municipal Schools, the employees serving in Municipal Schools are to be treated as akin to the Government servants or at the best, as part of subordinate services. Resultantly, the benefit must be extended by raising this substantial rather than main contention and a request is made ultimately to set aside the impugned action of treating the petitioners as overage candidates and consequently may be processed further for recruitment to the post. No other submissions have been made.