Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

V vs State

High Court Of Gujarat|27 March, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The petitioner has taken out present petition seeking below mentioned reliefs/directions:-
"11(C) Be pleased to direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's name for the promotion as Deputy Director.
(D) Be pleased to consider the petitioner eligible for the higher pay scale from the date of his appointment as per the 3rd Tikku Pay Commissioner due on from the month of May, 2002."
2. Heard Mr. Anvesh Vyas, learned advocate for the petitioner.
3. Though the petitioner is seeking direction qua the respondents to appoint him on higher post by way of promotion i.e. on the post of Deputy Director, on perusal of the petition, it has emerged that the petition is bereft of necessary details and except vague and bald allegation that juniors to him have been promoted, the petitioner has not mentioned relevant details. The eligibility and qualifying criteria necessary for the post on which the petitioner seeks promotion are not mentioned. It is also not mentioned as to whether the petitioner himself possesses and fulfills all necessary and qualifying conditions and criteria or not.
Besides this, it is also not clearly mentioned in the petition as to whether there is any vacancy on the post of Deputy Director or not and whether any promotion process are under process by the concerned department or not.
In absence of such necessary and relevant details, it is not possible, at this stage, to consider the request of the petitioner.
4. As can be seen from the relief prayed for in para - 11(C) [which is mentioned in the memo of petition as para - 11(D)] the petitioner wants himself to be considered eligible for higher pay scale from the date of his appointment. The said relief also, in absence of relevant details, is incapable for consideration.
With the aforesaid observations, present petition stands disposed of.
It is clarified that if the petitioner considers it necessary and if he is so advised and such circumstances exist and he considers it necessary to take out writ petition seeking reliefs and directions as prayed for in present petition, then, this order or writ petition would not stand in the way of the petitioner to take out appropriate proceedings before the appropriate Forum.
The petition accordingly disposed of.
(K.M.Thaker, J.) kdc Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

V vs State

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
27 March, 2012