Though called out twice, learned advocate for the petitioner was absent on each occasion.
2.Upon statement of the counsel for the petitioner that the present petition is identical to Special Civil Application No.9406 of 2003, by order dated 1.12.04, this petition was ordered to be notified along with Special Civil Application No.9406/03.
3.In this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Gujarat Secondary Education Tribunal on 28.12.99 in Application No.81/94. The petitioner has also prayed for regularization in the service. By a common order dated 28.12.99, the Gujarat Secondary Education Tribunal had been pleased to dispose of the application No.81/94 filed by the petitioner herein and certain other applications filed by other individual also. One Shri Maheshkumar Shukla who had filed application No.82/94 which also came to be disposed of by the same common order had approached this Court by filing Special Civil Application No.9406/03. The said petition came to be disposed of by the order dated 24.12.03 wherein the prayer for regularization was rejected on merits as well as on the ground of having approached the High Court belatedly. The learned Judge had made the following observations. "Neither of the said reliefs can be granted. It is not in dispute that at the relevant time, i.e. in the year 1991, the petitioner was not regularly selected. For the purpose of regularization in service, what is relevant is the date when the petitioner was selected by due procedure of law. The petitioner's claim for regularization in service retrospectively is unsustainable. Besides, though the petitioner had been regularly selected on 17th May, 1999; the impugned judgment has been delivered on 28th December, 1999, the present petition has been preferred almost four years thereafter. The delay of four years also has not been explained in the petition. The challenge to the order of Tribunal and claim for regularization in service with retrospective effect raised after four years requires to be rejected on the grounds of delay, latches and acquiescence.
For the aforesaid reasons, the petition is dismissed in limine. Notice is discharged."
4.As noted earlier, the counsel for the petitioner had himself stated that the facts in the present case are identical to those arising in Special Civil Application No.9406 of 2003. For the reasons recorded by the learned Judge in her order dated 24.12.03, this petition also deserves to be dismissed. The present petition is also filed after more than four years of the date of the order of the Gujarat Secondary Education Tribunal. On merits also, respectfully following the decision of the learned Judge, the petition is hereby rejected.
(Akil Kureshi, J.) (vjn)