Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 1044 (GUJ)

Bhargavkumar Hasmukhbhai Sachaniya v. Secretary

2021-11-22

A.S.SUPEHIA

body2021
JUDGMENT : 1. RULE. Learned advocate Ms.Roopal Patel and learned Assistant Government Pleader waive service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respective respondents. 2. The petitioner has challenged the action of the respondent authorities in rejecting his candidature for selection to the post of Accounts Officer, Class–I, Gujarat Accounts Service and Assistant Commissioner Commercial Tax, Class–I, Gujarat Commercial Tax Service. 3. Pursuant to the advertisement issued by the respondent No.1 for filing up the post of Accounts Officer, Class-I dated 28.12.2016, the petitioner applied for the same. The petitioner has cleared the preliminary examination conducted for the aforesaid post and thereafter he subsequently applied for the written examination pursuant to the subsequent advertisement on 23.08.2017 containing necessary instructions for filling up the application forms. Accordingly, the petitioner applied for the same. The petitioner was permitted to appear in the main examination, which was held on 06.01.2018 and 07.01.2018. The respondent No.1 prepared a list of disqualified candidates in the main examination on 03.05.2018. The name of the petitioner figured at serial No.79 and the reason for not selecting him to the concerned post was that he was not holding the requisite experience, as per the norms of the advertisement. The petitioner thereafter being aggrieved, filed a representation before the respondent authorities, however the same was not decided and the respondent No.1 published a further list of qualified candidates on 08.05.2018, which has constrained the petitioner to file the present writ petition. 4. Learned advocate Mr.Ravi B. Shah, appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the case of the petitioner has been solely rejected for the reason that he is not holding the requisite three years experience as envisaged in the advertisement dated 20.12.2016. He has submitted that such approach of the respondent authorities is illegal, since along with the application, the petitioner had annexed necessary certificates of his experience and the same was accepted. 4.1 Learned advocate for the petitioner has referred to the certificate dated 30.08.2017, issued by the District Treasury Officer, Bhavnagar, in which it is certified that the petitioner has worked initially for a period from 11.10.2012 to 15.04.2014 i.e. for one year, six months and five days and for the period from 02.06.2014 to 09.10.2014 i.e. for the period for 4 months and 8 days. 4.2 Learned advocate Mr.Shah, has placed reliance on the certificate issued by the Registrar General of the High Court of Gujarat dated 08.09.2017, wherein it is stated that the petitioner has worked in the Nazir department for two years, one month and five days. Thus, it is submitted that the petitioner has rendered more than three years of service and hence, the case of the petitioner could not have been rejected on the ground of lack of experience. 4.3 Learned advocate Mr.Shah, has further submitted that subsequently the petitioner had filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 and the authorities had conveyed that the certificate issued by the High Court of Gujarat cannot be considered, since the same will not satisfy the criteria of the advertisement. Thus, he has submitted that the writ petition may be allowed. 5. Per contra, learned advocate Ms.Roopal Patel appearing for the respondent No.1 – GPSC has submitted that the case of the petitioner has been precisely rejected by the respondent authority since the petitioner does not fulfill the requisite criteria of having three years experience as envisaged in the advertisement dated 20.12.2016. She has referred to the various clauses of the advertisement, more particularly clause No.4 which directs that the applicants to supply certificate with regard to their experience of three years. She has submitted that it is not in dispute that the petitioner has cleared M.Com., however he does not fulfill the criteria of having experience of three years of accounts / audit works. She has submitted that for being eligible for the concerned post, a candidate has to satisfy the requirement of three years experience related to work in the field of account and / or audit works on the post not below the rank of Office Superintendent, Class-III in the Government Office or any other institutes. It is submitted that the certificate issued by the Registrar, Gujarat High Court with regard to the experience cannot be considered since the same does not fulfill the requirement of the advertisement. Thus, she has submitted that since the petitioner lacks the aforesaid experience, the writ petition may be rejected. No further submission is advanced. 6. Upon a query raised by this Court, learned Advocate Ms.Patel appearing for the respondent-GPSC has specifically stated that the respondent has denied the selection to the petitioner for want of experience only. Thus, she has submitted that since the petitioner lacks the aforesaid experience, the writ petition may be rejected. No further submission is advanced. 6. Upon a query raised by this Court, learned Advocate Ms.Patel appearing for the respondent-GPSC has specifically stated that the respondent has denied the selection to the petitioner for want of experience only. Thus, the receipt of the experience certificate along with the application of the petitioner is not denied. 7. The facts stated hereinabove with regard to the filing of the application by the petitioner seeking appointment to the post of Accounts Officer, Class–I, is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner had initially applied for preliminary examination, which was held on 28.05.2017 for the aforesaid post and the same was cleared by him. The advertisement for filling up the said post was issued on 20.12.2016 and thereafter a subsidiary instructions / advertisement was issued for the candidates who cleared the preliminary examination for filing up the application for taking up the written examination. Such advertisement / instructions was issued on 23.08.2017. Accordingly, the petitioner applied for the said post and his application was also accepted. Along with the application, the petitioner had supplied the necessary certificates of his experience. The first certificate, which he annexed was dated 30.08.2017 issued by the District Treasury Officer, Bhavnagar certifying that the petitioner had worked on the post of Accountant (Group-I), initially for a period from 11.10.2012 to 15.04.2014 and thereafter he was relieved and subsequently appointed on 02.06.2014 to 09.10.2014. It is pertinent to note that the District Treasury Officer, Bhavnagar has also certified that the said certificate is issued for the purpose of advertisement issued by the GPSC for filling up the post of Accounts Officer, Class-I and Assistant Commissioner Commercial Tax, Class–I. Thus, the total experience of the petitioner as an accountant in Group–I, in the District Treasury Officer, Bhavnagar comes to 1 years, 10 months and 13 days. The respondent authorities have not raised any objection to the said experience. 8. The second certificate, which was supplied by the petitioner along with the application, is issued by the Registrar General of High Court of Gujarat dated 08.09.2017 certifying as below. -: CERTIFICATE :- This is to certify that, Mr. The respondent authorities have not raised any objection to the said experience. 8. The second certificate, which was supplied by the petitioner along with the application, is issued by the Registrar General of High Court of Gujarat dated 08.09.2017 certifying as below. -: CERTIFICATE :- This is to certify that, Mr. B.H. Sachaniya, Deputy Section Officer, is working on the establishment of this High Court of Gujarat, Ahmedabad since 13/10/2014 and his Pay in the pay Matrix is Rs.39900-126600 [L:7 C:4], in the said cadre. Duration of work : - (1) From 13/10/2014 to 26/07/2015 in Criminal Appeal Department. (2) From 27/07/2015 to 31/08/2017 in Nazir Department, work related to Budget Table. (Total Experience of 02 Years 01 Month 05 Days). This Certificate is issued as requested by Mr. B.H. Sanchaniya, Deputy Section Officer, for the purpose of forwarding along with the application for the post of Account Officer, Class-I and Assistant Commissioner Commercial Tax, Class-I, to Gujarat Public Service Commission. High Court of Gujarat, Sola, Ahmedabad – 380 060 Date : 8/09/2017 Sd- (P.R. Patel) REGISTRAR GENERAL” 9. It is certified by the Registrar General of this Court that the petitioner had worked as a Deputy Section Officer in the establishment of the High Court of Gujarat from 13.10.2014 to 26.07.2015 in the Criminal Appeal Department and from 27.07.2015 to 31.08.2017 in the Nazir Department. Thus, the petitioner has rendered services as a Deputy Section Officer in the Nazir Department for two years, one month and five days. At this stage, it would be apposite to incorporate the conditions satisfied in the advertisement dated 20.12.2016. The relevant provision of conditions No.4 specified in the advertisement dated 20.12.2016 which reads as under (as translated from original Gujarati). At this stage, it would be apposite to incorporate the conditions satisfied in the advertisement dated 20.12.2016. The relevant provision of conditions No.4 specified in the advertisement dated 20.12.2016 which reads as under (as translated from original Gujarati). “OR The candidate must have the degree of M.B.A. or M.Com or M.Sc.(Mathematics) or M.A.(Statastics / Economics / Mathematics) in Second Class from any university established in India under Central or State Act or any of the universities established or incorporated there under or approved as such or from any other educational Institution declared as deemed university under section-3 of The University Grants Commission Act, 1965 AND must have about three years experience of accounts and/or audit work on the post not below the rank of Superintendent Class-III in the Government Office or must have about three years experience of accounts and/or audit work on the post equivalent to the post not below the rank of Office Superintendent in Government from the Board or Corporation or University or Banking Corporation established under the Act or Rules there under or in the Company or Chartered Accountant Firm registered under The Companies Act, 1956.” 10. The condition, as barely read, will indicate that a candidate has to possess three years experience related to the accounts and / or audit works on the post not below the rank of Office Superintendent, Class–III, in the Government or he has rendered three years experience related the accounts and / or audit works in a Board or University or Banking Organization established under the Act of rules or in company under the companies act or a Chartered Accountant firms on the equivalent post not below the rank of Office Superintendent, Class-III in the government recognized as such by the Government. 11. So far as the certificate issued by the District Treasury Officer, Bhavnagar on 30.08.2017 is concerned, the respondent authority cannot ignore the same, as it specifically states that the petitioner has worked as an Accountant, Group-I in the Treasury Office and even in the affidavit it is recognized by the respondent No.1 that the experience of year 10 months is counted but the experience in the establishment of the High Court of Gujarat, on the post of Deputy Section Officer from 13.10.2014 to 31.08.2017 is ignored by the respondent authority. It is stated by the respondent authorities that the service rendered by the petitioner in the Nazir Department while discharging the duties, related to the budget table cannot be considered as a requisite experience. 12. It is not disputed by the respondent No.1 that the petitioner was worked on the post of Deputy Section Officer. The respondents are also not disputing that the establishment of the High Court of Gujarat does not fall within the definition of “Government” or other organization as mentioned in Clause-4 of the advertisement. The only objection is raised that the work of the petitioner in the Nazir Department relating to the budget table cannot be counted. No reason is coming-forth either in the affidavit or from the submissions advanced by learned advocate for the respondent No.1 indicating as to why the work of the petitioner rendered as a Deputy Section Officer in the Nazir Department in the establishment of the Gujarat High Court relating to the budget table is not required to be counted for the purpose of calculating three years of experience relating to the accounts / audit work. Without verification of the nature of work assigned to the petitioner as a Deputy Section Officer in the Nazir Department of the High Court, the respondent authority could not have ignored the certificate issued by the Registrar General. The clarification with regard to the duties or work assigned to the Deputy Section officer of Nazir Department was required to be obtained either from the petitioner or from the establishment of the High Court before ignoring the certificate. The petitioner has ascertained that while working in the Nazir Department he used to deal with the account related work. The Nazir Department of the High Court of Gujarat deals with all the account related work and the petitioner has been employed in such Department for the period of two years, one month and five days as a Deputy Section Officer. The experience rendered by the petitioner in the Nazir Department on the establishment of the High Court of Gujarat as a Deputy Section Officer cannot be ignored for the purpose of calculating three years of experience as envisaged in Clause-4 of the advertisement dated 20.12.2016. Thus, the action of the respondent authorities ignoring the experience of the petitioner is illegal and misreading. This petition therefore, merits acceptance. 13. Thus, the action of the respondent authorities ignoring the experience of the petitioner is illegal and misreading. This petition therefore, merits acceptance. 13. For the foregoing reasons and analysis, the following order is passed. 13.1 This writ petition is allowed. The impugned action of the respondents is quashed and set aside. 13.2 The respondent authorities are hereby directed to place the name of the petitioner in the list of the candidates selected for the post of Accounts Officer Class–I and the Assistant Commissioner Commercial Tax Officer Class-I. In case the respondents have appointed any person, who is having less merits than the petitioner, then the petitioner shall be appointed from the date of appointment of such candidate with consequential benefits like seniority. The intervening period shall be treated only for the purpose of pay fixation and seniority. He will not be entitled to actual arrears and pay. 13.3 The name of the petitioner shall be appropriately placed in the merit list as per his merit. 13.4 The entire exercise shall be carried out within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the writ of this Court. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid extent.