(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI) 1. We have heard Mr. P.P. Majmudar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants – original petitioners.
2. This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the appellants – original petitioners challenging the judgment and order dated 1.10.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.10779 of 2012 by which the writ petition filed by the petitioners has been dismissed.
3. The appellants were appointed as Peon on Class-IV post in District Court, Palanpur on 4.3.2008. The initial appointment was for a period of 26 days with the salary of Rs.4500/- per month. The appellants' appointment was renewed from time to time for fixed period. However, an advertisement has been issued by the Gujarat High Court for State Lower Courts services for the post of Driver, Bailiff – Class III and Peon – Class IV as the Gujarat High Court is holding a centralized examination for all the Districts.
4. Since the advertisement has been issued, the writ petition was filed by the appellants – original petitioners claiming that since they are working since long for about three years, their service should be regularized.
5. It is not disputed that the petitioners were appointed for fixed period and fixed salary which was extended from time to time without following the Rules for making regular appointment on Class IV post.
6. The learned Single Judge, in our opinion, has rightly dismissed the writ petition on the ground that since the regular selection is being held and the petitioners who have entered back door cannot be permitted to defeat the advertisement for holding the regular selection. Further, in the appointment of the appellants, it was clearly written that they would be terminated at any time without any notice and the appellants have given undertaking that their appointment is purely temporary and adhoc basis and for the period upto regular recruitment is made and they will not claim any regular appointment or benefit of regular appointment on the basis of such appointment. In this view of the matter, the learned Single Judge did not commit any error in dismissing the writ petition. We are in agreement with the view taken by the learned Single Judge. This appeal is devoid of any merits and is accordingly dismissed.
7. Since appeal is dismissed, civil application for stay does not survive and it is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
[V. M. SAHAI, J.] Sd/-
[G. B. SHAH, J.] Savariya