NATVARLAL AMARSHIBHAI DEVANI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned AGP Mr. Rohan Yagnik waives service of rule on behalf of respondent no. 1 and learned advocate Mr. Premal Joshi waives service of rule on behalf of respondent no. 2. With the consent of the learned advocate for the respective parties, the matter is heard finally.

(2.) The present petition under Articles 14, 16, 311(2) and 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for the purpose of seeking the following reliefs :

(3.) The petitioner has come out with a case that he has joined the services as Junior Clerk on 06.12.1985 and was then selected and appointed as a Sub Inspector (P&E) by direct recruitment with effect from 02.11.2001 and subsequently, was also promoted to the post of Inspector (P&E) ClassIII with effect from 21.01.2009. There were two vacant posts in the promotional cadre of Superintendent of Prohibition and Excise ClassII, having fallen vacant, the department wanted to fill up the post and since in the feeder cadre two employees namely the present petitioner and one Mr. S.R. Vasava were possessing of requisite qualifications as per the recruitment rules, their cases were considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC). At the relevant time, when the DPC considered the case of both, the petitioner as well as Mr. Vasava since there was nothing adverse to them and they were fulfilling the criteria of merit as well as efficiency, they came to be selected by the DPC in the proceedings dated 22.01.2014. On the basis of said selection/recommendation made by DPC, the Home Department respondent no.1 herein, issued the order of promotion on 30.01.2014 with respect to the present petitioner to the post of Superintendent of Prohibition and Excise ClassII, in anticipation of the approval from the GPSC. It is the case of the petitioner that the said promotion was adhoc as the approval from the GPSC was awaiting. Nonetheless, was posted and granted promotion against the clear vacancy at Kutch Bhuj. The petitioner took the charge on the said promotional post on 30.01.2014 and vide order dated 13.02.2014, an order was also issued by the Accounts Officer showing up the fixation of the petitioner on the promotional post.