BHIKHULAL PUNJABHAI MAKWANA v. STATE OF GUJARAT
Court: High Court of Gujarat
Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Gujarat judgment dated 2026-01-22. BHIKHULAL PUNJABHAI MAKWANA v. STATE OF GUJARAT. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 658 of 2026 ========================================================== BHIKHULAL PUNJABHAI MAKWANA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. ========================================================== Appearance : MR HARDIK D MUCHHALA for the Petitioner. DEVANSHI PATEL, AGP for the Respondents. ========================================= CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI Date : 22/01/2026 ORAL ORDER 1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Hardik D. Muchhala on behalf of the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader on behalf of the respondents – State. 2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent – State. 3.
By way of this petition, the petitioner inter alia challenges the inaction on part of the respondents more particularly the Scrutiny Committee of not verifying the caste certi0cate issued in favour of the petitioner, which has led to the petitioner, who is selected for the post of Lokrakshak Police Constable, Class - III, but, not getting appointment. 4. Learned Advocate Mr. Hardik D. Muchhala would draw the attention of this Court to an order of learned Co- ordinate Bench dated 26. 07. 2021 which has been con0rmed by Hon’ble Division Bench vide an order dated 25. 11.
2021 and whereas learned Advocate would submit that in a similar scenario, since the Scrutiny Committee had not veri0ed the caste certi0cate within reasonable time, the learned Co-ordinate Bench was pleased to direct the respondent authorities to give provisional appointment to the petitioner therein more particularly within a period of two months from the date of receipt of writ of the Court and whereas it was also clari0ed that if the caste certi0cate of the petitioner was found not to be genuine, the petitioner would not be entitled to bene0t of provisional appointment. It was further clari0ed that if the caste certi0cate was found genuine it will be open for the petitioner to claim actual appointment from the date his juniors were appointed and also continuity of service and other bene0ts. 4. 1. Learned Advocate Mr. Hardik D. Muchhala would also draw the attention of this Court to order dated 25. 11. 2021 passed by Hon’ble Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No.
984 of 2021 whereby the above-referred order of learned Co- ordinate Bench had been challenged and whereas vide said order, the Hon’ble Court had also rejected the challenge, con0rming the order of the Hon’ble Division Bench. Learned Advocate Mr. Hardik D. Muchhala would submit that since the issue in question in the petition before the Hon’ble Co-ordinate Bench and the subject in issue in the present petition being the same, this Court may pass similar order in this petition also. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Dhruti Pandya for the respondents while she could not dispute the fact about orders being passed by the learned Co-ordinate Bench and whereas the same being con0rmed by Hon’ble Division Bench, would submit that the State is contemplating to have a comprehensive exercise more particularly considering the fact that certain aspects of the issue in dispute are pending before the Hon’ble Division Bench.
She would further submit that in any case if similar orders were to be passed then some more time may be granted to the Government. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned Advocates for the parties, in the considered opinion of this Court, order dated 26. 07. 2021 passed by learned Co- ordinate Bench in Special Civil Application No. 1858 of 2021 con0rmed by Hon’ble Division Bench was passed in similar set of facts and therefore the decision would be binding on this Court and whereas judicial propriety demands that this Court should also follow the same view as laid down by learned Co-ordinate Bench con0rmed by Hon’ble Division Bench. 7. Having regard to the same, it is directed that the respondents shall give provisional appointment to the petitioner, to the posts of Lokrakshak Police Constable, Class - III, subject to the 0nal decision taken by the Scrutiny Committee.
Such order shall be issued by the respondents within a period of four months from the date of receipt of writ of this order. 8. It is clari0ed that in case the Scrutiny Committee comes to a conclusion before the period of four months that the caste certi0cate produced by the petitioner was not genuine then the respondents are not required to give provisional appointment to the present petitioner. In this regard that it is further clari0ed that before 0nally deciding as to the genuineness of the caste certi0cate all procedure as contemplated under the law shall be followed by the respondents. 8.
1 It is further clari0ed that in case the Scrutiny Committee does not take any decision as regards the genuineness of the caste certi0cate then provisional appointments shall be issued to the petitioner in the posts referred to herein above and whereas after the Scrutiny Committee comes to a conclusion, as regards the veracity and genuineness of the caste certi0cate of the petitioner then (A) in case if the caste certi0cate is not found to be genuine it would be for the respondents to forthwith terminate the services of the petitioner or not further extend provisional appointment (B) if the caste certi0cate is found to be genuine then it will be open for the petitioner to claim seniority and all other bene0ts including but not limited to continuity of service etc as would be available to him from the date when juniors to the present petitioner had been appointed to the post in question. 9. With the aforesaid directions, present petition stands disposed of. 9. 1.
The petitioner is directed to cooperate with the process of scrutiny of the documents by producing original documents, as and when called by the Scrutiny Committee. 9. 1. 1. Learned Advocate, Mr. Muchhala, submitted that the petitioner will cooperate with the Scrutiny Committee in the aforesaid exercise, but he may be informed about the date and time, on which to appear before the Scrutiny Committee in advance, by way of speed post, which shall be done by the Committee. Rule is made absolute to the above extent. Direct service is permitted. (NIRZAR S. DESAI,J) SAVARIYA Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: RAJNISH NARENDRA SAVARIYA(HC00179), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 22/01/2026 17:22:07
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.