TINABHAI NARANBHAI RATHVA vs STATE OF GUJARAT
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
- Case type
- SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION
- Decided on
- 16-03-2026
C/SCA/11098/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.11098 of 2024
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE :
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
=========================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
NO
=========================================
TINABHAI NARANBHAI RATHVA & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
=========================================
Appearance :
YASH G PATEL for the Petitioners.
MS FORAM TRIVEDI, AGP for the Respondents.
=========================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 16/03/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. With the consent of learned advocates appearing for
the parties, the matter was taken up finally. Hence, Rule . Learned
Assistant Government Pleader waives service of rule on behalf of
the respondents.
2. By way of the present petition, the petitioner has
prayed for the following reliefs :-
“(A) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to
admit and allow the present petition;
(B) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to
Page 1 of 6
Uploaded by R.N. SAVARIYA(HC00179) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 18:18:32 IST 2026
C/SCA/11098/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
direct the respondent authorities to consider the
appointment of the petitioners from the same day of
appointment as their colleagues as per the
Notification dated 16.12.2019 and in accordance
with the order passed by this Hon’ble Court in
Special Civil Application No.22111 of 2019 (Ann. C)
(C) Be pleased to consider the actual
appointments from the date their seniors have been
so promoted;
(D) Be pleased to consider the benefits of
continuity of service to the present petitioners;”
3. The limited grievance of the petitioners herein, 27 in
number, applied for the post of Lokrakshak in various categories
and ultimately, all the present petitioners who belong to ST
category were selected and got appointment pursuant to the
advertisement that was published in the year 2018 between
15.8.2018 to 7.9.2018. However, their appointment orders were
not issued as their caste certificates were pending scrutiny before
the Scrutiny Committee and hence, the petitioners preferred
Special Civil Application No.22211 of 2019 for provisional
appointment which was granted by the coordinate Bench of this
Court vide order dated 16.9.2022 and respondents have acted upon
the said order and given appointments to the petitioners as
Lokrakshaks.
4. Thereafter, the petitioners’ caste certificates were
scrutinized and their appointments were regularized with effect
Page 2 of 6
Uploaded by R.N. SAVARIYA(HC00179) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 18:18:32 IST 2026
C/SCA/11098/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
from 14.12.2022.
5. It is the case of the petitioners that as per the terms of
appointment, the petitioners were to given a fixed salary of
Rs.19,950/- per month from the date of appointment for a period of
five years and thereafter, after five years upon being eligible for
next increment, they would be placed in the regular pay scale. It is
the case of the petitioner that the final merit list was published on
1.12.2019. However, as the petitioners’ appointment was made
only in the year 2022, they were not granted the benefit of
regularization right from the date on which the notification was
published i.e. 16.12.2019 i.e. the date on which petitioners’ senior
got appointment whose caste certificates were not under any
scrutiny.
6. Learned advocate Mr. Yash Patel submitted that in
similar set of facts, other persons who are identically situated
preferred Special Civil Application No.4608 of 2023 and allied
matters in case of Rajeshbhai Parsingbhai Rathva v. Director
General of Police and vide order dated 13.7.2023 , the
coordinate Bench of this Court while allowing the petition directed
the respondents to give the appointment to those petitioners with
effect from 3.5.2019.
It is clarified by learned advocate Mr. Patel that the
Notification in respect of various Districts was published on
different dates and, therefore, in case of present petitioners who
belonged to Ahmedabad district, as the Notification was published
on 16.12.2019 and, therefore, looking to the ratio of the above
decision, the present petitioners’ appointments be considered to
Page 3 of 6
Uploaded by R.N. SAVARIYA(HC00179) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 18:18:32 IST 2026
C/SCA/11098/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
have been given from 16.12.2019 and not from the year 2022.
7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Foram
Trivedi, upon instructions received from Mr. A. J. Patel, Office
Superintendent, B Branch, DGP Office, categorically stated that the
case of the present petitioners is required to be considered at par
with the identically situated petitioners of Special Civil Application
No.4608 of 2023 and allied matters in case of Rajeshbhai
Parsingbhai Rathva v. Director General of Police decided on
13.7.2023, and the cases of the present petitioners cannot be
distinguished and, therefore, considering the fact that the facts of
the present petition are identical and hence, this Court may pass
appropriate order.
8. I have heard learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties and perused the paper. Upon considering the
submissions made by learned advocate Mr. Yash Patel that the
petitioners are entitled to the same benefit as has been given to the
petitioners of Special Civil Application No.4608 of 2023 and
allied matters in case of Rajeshbhai Parsingbhai Rathva v.
Director General of Police, decided on 13.7.2023 , the Court
has considered the observations made by the coordinate Bench in
the said judgment. Paragraph 8 of the said decision reads as
under:-
“8. Therefore, issues raised in this petition are to
be decided in favour of the petitioners. In this case,
the caste certificate of petitioner of Special Civil
Application No.4608 of 2023 - Rajeshbhai
Parsingbhai Rathva, has been verified and found to
be genuine, therefore as directed by this court in
Page 4 of 6
Uploaded by R.N. SAVARIYA(HC00179) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 18:18:32 IST 2026
C/SCA/11098/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
the order dated 16.09.2019 in Special Civil
Application No.22111 of 2019, the said petitioner is
entitled for regular appointment w.e.f 03.05.2019.
The other two petitioners of Special Civil
Application No.4715 of 2023 – Rakeshbhai
Salambhai Khant and Special Civil Application
No.4684 of 2023 – Kamleshkumar Jivanbhai Pandor
respectively, are entitled for provisional
appointment w.e.f 03.05.2019.”
9. In paragraph 10 of the said decision, the coordinate
Bench has made following observations and issued following
directions, which reads as under :-
“10. In view of above following directions are
issued :
(1) The petitioner of petition No 4608 of 2023
would be entitled for appointment w.e.f. 03.05.2019,
since in his case the caste certificate has been
verified by the scrutiny committee, irrespective of
him being declared unfit as Armed Lok Rakshak due
to defective colour vision.
(2) The Petitioner of Special Civil Application
No.4684 of 2023, would be entitled for provisional
appointment w.e.f. 03.05.2019, since his caste
certificate is pending scrutiny by the scrutiny
committee, irrespective of him being declared unfit
as Armed Lok Rakshak due to defective colour
Page 5 of 6
Uploaded by R.N. SAVARIYA(HC00179) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 18:18:32 IST 2026
C/SCA/11098/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
vision.
(3) The Petitioner of Special Civil Application
No.4715 of 2023, would also be entitled for
provisional appointment w.e.f 03.05.2019, since his
caste certificate is pending scrutiny by the scrutiny
committee, irrespective of him being declared unfit
as Armed Lok Rakshak due to defective colour
vision.
(4) The respondents are directed to consider the
cases of all three petitioners as directed herein
above, within a period of eight weeks from the date
of receipt of the order. Needless to say, that
whatever consequential benefits entitled on
appointment of the said post shall be given to the
present petitioners.”
10. As it could not be disputed by learned Assistant
Government Pleader Ms. Trivedi, the directions issued in
paragraph 10, reproduced herein above, would be applicable to the
present petitioners as well. However, the petitioners are declared
to be entitled for appointment w.e.f. 16.12.2019, the date on which
the Notification qua others was published.
11. With the above observations and directions, the present
petition stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the above
extent. No order as to costs.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
SAVARIYA
Page 6 of 6
Uploaded by R.N. SAVARIYA(HC00179) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 18:18:32 IST 2026