(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J. DESAI) 1 We have heard Mr. B.S. Patel, learned Senior Counsel for appellants and Ms. Jirga Jhaveri, learned AGP for respondents. The present appeal is listed for admission today, but, with the consent of the learned Advocates appearing for the parties, we have taken up this appeal for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
2 Admit. Ms. Jirga Jhaveri, learned AGP, waives service of notice of admission on behalf of respondents.
3 By way of the present appeal,the appellants–original petitioners have challenged the Order dated 27.9.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.3733 of 2010, by which the learned Single Judge has dismissed the petition mainly on the ground that the petitioner Trust is not entitled to receive any grant for salary in favour of employees who are working with the petitioner institutions as they were appointed without following the due procedure prescribed by various Government Resolutions. By way of an affidavit-in-rejoinder dated 25th September, 2011, in the appeal proceedings, the appellants have produced a common Oral Order dated 25.1.2011 passed by this Court in group of writ petitions wherein the petitioners were running `ashramshalas' like the present appellants, whose case was considered on the basis of the statement made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, which is reproduced here-in-below:
“The State Government would withdraw its resolution/order dated 04.08.2010 impugned in some of the petitions, to the extent that the Government has refused to approve the engagement of the service of the petitioners and other teaching staff of Ashramshalas across the State, on the ground that their engagement by the respective Trust/ Societies is not in accordance with the terms and conditions mentioned in the No Objection Certificate issued by the Commissioner, Tribal Development, or is otherwise not proper and legal. The Government would also withdraw impugned order dated 16.09.2010 and all other consequential orders passed by the State authorities. Considering that a large number of petitions have been filed before this Court by such teachers whose engagement in service has not been approved as well as the numerous representations received from them praying for reconsideration of its decision by the State Government,the Department would constitute a Committee to reconsider the issue of regularity/ irregularity in the engagement of these teachers by the respective Ashramshalas. The Committee would comprise of 3 officers of the State Government–one officer from the Department of Tribal Development not below the rank of Deputy Secretary, one from the office of the Commissioner, Tribal Development not below the rank of Deputy Director and one from the Education Department or the Tribal Research and Training Institute. The Committee would issue individual notices to each of the Ashramshalas across the State, calling for a response from them as to whether the teaching staff recruited by it is as per the conditions enumerated in the No Objection Certificate, whether the recruitment procedure prescribed by law has been scrupulously followed, and whether the recruitment is otherwise in accordance with the rules and guidelines. If it is found that any person has been appointed by the Ashramshala de-hors the prescribed conditions, or by not following the prescribed procedure, or that the appointment of any person is otherwise found to be not in consonance with rules and law on the subject, an opportunity of hearing would be given to both the management of the Ashramshalas and the concerned person/petitioner. After affording a due opportunity of hearing to the management of each Ashramshala and also the person whose appointment is not found to be proper and considering their respective submissions, the Committee shall give a report to the Secretary, Tribal Development. After considering the report of the Committee, the Government shall take a decision on whether to frame a one time scheme to regularize the engagement of those teachers/petitioners who have been appointed irregularly by the management of the Ashramshalas, subject to such conditions as are found reasonable. It is, however, made clear that this concession on the part of the Government of reconsidering the cases of the petitioners and other teaching members of the concerned Ashramshalas does not confer any legal, equitable or other indefeasible right in their favour of being granted approval. Also, this concession may not be construed as any promise being held out by the Government to favourably consider their respective cases.”
4 Mr. B.S. Patel, learned Advocate for the appellants has contended that the case of the present appellants is also similar in nature to those petitioners and, therefore, the present case shall also be considered by the Committee constituted by the State Government.
5 On the other hand, learned AGP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri, has vehemently argued that the case of the present appellants is not similar to the case of those petitioners and therefore statement made by the learned AGP in group of writ petitions, would not be applicable to the facts of the present case.
6 We are of the opinion that since the Government has constituted the Committee for the purpose of considering the case of employees of different Ashramshalas, the Committee can include the case of the employees of the present appellants. Therefore, in our opinion, the present appellants shall be at liberty to approach the authority and plead their case by way of making a detailed representation, which may be considered by the authority on merits and in accordance with law.
7 We have not decided the Appeal on merits but have directed the appellants to make representation to the committee.
8 In the result, the present appeal succeeds and the same is allowed accordingly. The Order dated 27.9.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.3733 of 2010 is set aside. The appellants are directed to file a representation to the concerned authority within a period of two weeks from today and the concerned authority shall decide the same on merits and in accordance with law within a period of three months thereafter and to pass a reasoned speaking order. There shall be no order as to costs.
(V.M. SAHAI, J.) (A.J. DESAI, J.) pnnair