Appointment benefits relate back to the original selection date despite delays in caste certificate scrutiny.

The 27 petitioners, belonging to the Scheduled Tribe (ST) category, applied for the post of Lokrakshak pursuant to a 2018 advertisement

Although the final merit list was published on 01.12.2019, the petitioners’ appointment orders were withheld pending the scrutiny of their caste certificates by the Scrutiny Committee

Following an interim order by the High Court in a previous petition (SCA No. 22211 of 2019), the petitioners received provisional appointments in 2022, which were regularized on 14.12.2022 after their certificates were found genuine

The petitioners sought a direction to the respondent authorities to treat their appointments as effective from 16.12.2019—the date their colleagues and seniors were appointed—and to grant them consequential benefits including continuity of service and regular pay scale increments

1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to the benefit of appointment, seniority, and continuity of service from the date their colleagues were appointed (16.12.2019) rather than the date of their actual appointment in 2022

2. Whether the delay in appointment caused solely by the administrative process of caste certificate scrutiny should deprive the petitioners of benefits granted to identically situated candidates

The court relied on the principle of parity among identically situated employees.

It specifically applied the precedent set by the coordinate Bench of the Gujarat High Court in Rajeshbhai Parsingbhai Rathva v. Director General of Police (Special Civil Application No. 4608 of 2023 and allied matters, decided on 13.07.2023)

This precedent establishes that if a candidate’s caste certificate is subsequently verified as genuine, they are entitled to regular appointment and benefits effective from the date their peers were appointed, notwithstanding the delay caused by the scrutiny process

The court observed that the facts of the present case were identical to those in the Rajeshbhai Parsingbhai Rathva case

The petitioners’ appointments were delayed only because of the pending verification of their ST certificates, a factor beyond their control.

During the proceedings, the Assistant Government Pleader (AGP), representing the State, conceded that the petitioners’ cases could not be distinguished from the cited precedent

The court reasoned that since the petitioners were ultimately found eligible and their certificates genuine, they must be placed on equal footing with their colleagues who were appointed via the notification dated 16.12.2019

The court emphasized that the ratio of the prior decision necessitated the grant of retrospective benefits to ensure the petitioners were not unfairly penalized for administrative delays in the verification process

The court held that the petitioners are entitled to have their appointments considered effective from 16.12.2019, the date the notification was published for their district

The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioners' cases and grant all consequential benefits arising from such appointment, including seniority and continuity of service, within eight weeks

No order as to costs was made