Featured image for Supreme Court Judgment dated 19-04-2018 in case of petitioner name Rabari Prabhatbhai Gugubhai & vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
| |

Supreme Court Directs Adjustment of Selected Candidates in Gujarat Driver Recruitment Case

The case of Rabari Prabhatbhai Gugubhai & Ors. v. State of Gujarat & Ors. revolved around the appointment of drivers in subordinate courts in Gujarat. The appellants, who had been selected through the recruitment process, approached the Supreme Court after their appointments were denied due to procedural issues in the selection process.

Background of the Case

The appellants were selected for the post of drivers in various subordinate courts in Gujarat. Out of them, five candidates were selected under the General category, and one candidate was selected under the Socially and Economically Backward Category (SEBC). However, their appointments were stalled due to the peculiar system of applying options in the selection process. The Gujarat High Court had only considered their first preference, and since those positions were not available, they were not accommodated in other available vacancies.

The appellants, feeling aggrieved by this, filed a case before the Gujarat High Court in LPA No. 406 of 2016. The High Court dismissed their plea on 07.10.2016, leading them to approach the Supreme Court.

Arguments by the Appellants

The appellants contended that:

  • The concept of ‘option’ should allow candidates to be considered for their second or third choices if the first choice was unavailable.
  • The authorities should have adjusted them in the available vacancies instead of denying them appointments outright.
  • Since a fresh recruitment process was underway for 24 vacancies, they should be accommodated against these vacancies.

Arguments by the Respondents

The respondents, including the Gujarat High Court, argued that:

  • The selection process was conducted as per the established norms, and the appellants were not placed due to their option preferences.
  • The fresh recruitment process had already begun, and adjusting previous candidates might disrupt the selection process.
  • Any adjustment should be made only if the Supreme Court directed it specifically.

Supreme Court’s Judgment

The Supreme Court took note of the fresh recruitment process for 24 vacancies of drivers and issued an interim order on 05.04.2018:

“Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that the interest of justice would be met if the appellants are adjusted to any of the 24 posts.”

In response, the Gujarat High Court submitted an affidavit on 16.04.2018, confirming that vacancies were available and the appellants could be adjusted if the Supreme Court directed so.

Based on this affidavit and in the interest of justice, the Supreme Court ruled:

“In the above circumstances, these appeals are disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to adjust the appellants accordingly, by appointing them as fresh candidates in their respective categories.”

The Court clarified that this decision was made due to the peculiar facts of this case and should not be treated as a precedent.

Key Takeaways from the Judgment

  • Candidates in government recruitment should be given fair opportunities in case of procedural irregularities.
  • The Supreme Court prioritizes justice over technicalities when genuine selection issues arise.
  • Courts can intervene in ongoing recruitment processes to ensure fairness.
  • This ruling is specific to the circumstances of this case and does not set a general precedent.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision ensured that the appellants, who were initially denied appointments due to procedural anomalies, were accommodated in available vacancies. The ruling reaffirmed the principle that administrative technicalities should not override fair opportunities for deserving candidates. However, the Court explicitly stated that this decision was case-specific and should not be generalized for future recruitment disputes.


Petitioner Name: Rabari Prabhatbhai Gugubhai & Ors..
Respondent Name: State of Gujarat & Ors..
Judgment By: Justice Kurian Joseph, Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Justice Navin Sinha.
Place Of Incident: Gujarat.
Judgment Date: 19-04-2018.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Rabari Prabhatbhai G vs State of Gujarat & O Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 19-04-2018.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Employment Disputes
See all petitions in Recruitment Policies
See all petitions in Public Sector Employees
See all petitions in Judgment by Kurian Joseph
See all petitions in Judgment by Mohan M. Shantanagoudar
See all petitions in Judgment by Navin Sinha
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments April 2018
See all petitions in 2018 judgments

See all posts in Service Matters Category
See all allowed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Service Matters Category

Similar Posts