Gujarat High Court
SCA/5506/1985 of BHIKLALAL R A VAGHELA Vs STATE OF GUJARAT on 16 December 1996
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 5506 of 1985 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 5506 of 1985
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE
============================================================
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgement?
4. Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?
5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge?
-------------------------------------------------------------- BHIKLALAL R A VAGHELAVersus STATE OF GUJARAT -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR DM THAKKAR for Petitioner MR HL JANI for Respondent -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE Date of decision: 16/12/96ORAL JUDGMENT Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I do not find any substance in this Special Civil Application. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that the petitioner has been promoted to the post of Deputy Soil Survey Officer on his consent. The learned counsel for the petitioner also does not dispute that the post of Deputy Soil Survey Officer and that of Assistant Research Officer are not interchangeable.
3. The channel of promotion has been provided to both the posts, i.e. Deputy Soil Survey Officer and Assistant Research Officer, from the fedder post, i.e. Senior Scientific Assistant. The promotions are made on the availability of the post of Deputy Soil Survey Officer or Assistant Research Officer. When the post of Deputy Soil Survey Officer fell vacant, the petitioner has been offered promotion and he accepted the same. Now what the petitioner contends is that he may be given promotion to the post of Assistant Research Officer from 20th February 1980. The learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any Rule or Regulation under which the petitioner can claim such right. It may be an unfortunate circumstance, but it is a fact that the petitioner himself has accepted, on availability of the said post, promotion on the post of Deputy Soil Survey Officer, and as such, he has to continue now on this post. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in the case of Shri B.R. Desai of the same Department, transfer was permitted from the post of Deputy Soil Survey Officer to the Assistant Research Officer. By this instance, it is too difficult to accept the plea of discrimination, moreso when in the reply, the respondents have given out that such incident may happen either way and it cannot be permitted to be made an issue for grievance. The learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to make out any case of infringement of legal and fundamental rights of the petitioner.
4. In the result, this Special Civil Application fails and the same is dismissed. Rule discharged. Interim relief, if any, granted by this Court, stands fails and the same is dismissed. Rule discharged. Interim relief, if any, granted by this Court, stands vacated. No order as to costs.
.......