On 29.07.1998, this Court passed the following order while issuing Rule in the petition:
"RULE.
Heard the learned Advocates for the parties on the question of interim relief. The petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste. On her name being sponsored by the Employment Exchange, she was selected and appointed as Telephone Operator by order dated 19.5.1989 on temporary basis for a period of 29 days. She was given appointment from time to time and as such she continued in service with the respondent. Her services were sought to be terminated on the ground that there is no post of Telephone Operator available. Mr J D Jani, Executive Officer on behalf of the respondent No.1 filed an affidavit stating that as there is no post of Telephone Operator from 1991, the said post has been discontinued and merged in the cadre of Junior Clerk. It is also submitted that the petitioner cannot be further continued. Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner has invited my attention to office order - Annexure 'E' dated 23.3.98 whereby leave was refused on the ground that the work of Telephone Operator falls in the category of urgent service. This indicates that though the stand taken that the post of Operator was abolished as back as in 1991, her services as Telephone Operator is required even today.
2. Considering all facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that the petitioner shall be continued in service as adhoc temporary employee, and she will be given opportunity to appear at the regular selection as and when they are held. Following the course adopted by the Apex Court in a case reported in 1996 (7)SCC 562, para 5 it is directed that if at the time of selection she is found barred by age, necessary relaxation may be given to the extent of the period of her service since 1989. Direct Service."
2. Learned counsel Mr. P.S. Patel for the petitioner pointed out page 27M in the petition which is a communication dated 19.11.2005 by the Additional Director, Medical Education, Gandhinagar, with reference to the aforesaid order passed by this Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further pointed out from the averments in the additional affidavit dated 16.03.2009 that advertisement was issued by the Gujarat Subordinate Selection Board on 20.11.2008 for recruitment of Junior Clerks in the office of respondent no.2, that petitioner had applied and the application of the petitioner was received by the office and was also inwarded. The details are mentioned in paragraph nos. 3, 4 and 5 of the affidavit. He further submitted that thereafter, the petitioner did not hear anything about his application.
4. Learned A.G.P. is required to take instructions and file necessary affidavit to respond to the aforesaid aspects and facts pointed out by the petitioner. Necessary affidavit may be filed within two weeks.
5. Special Civil Application No.2819 of 2000, which is tagged with present petition may also be posted together.
6. Post the matters after two weeks.
(N.V.
ANJARIA, J.) [sn devu pps] Top