High Court of Gujarat
JAYESHKUMAR DEVABHAI MUCHHALversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Decided
- Disposal
- 58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH
- Bench
- NIRZAR S DESAI
Holding
The Court ordered provisional appointment of the petitioner, subject to the Scrutiny Committee’s final decision, following the binding precedent of the earlier Co‑ordinate and Division Bench orders.
Summary
The petitioner, a selected Lok Rakshak‑Police Constable (Class‑III), filed a special civil application challenging the State’s failure to verify his caste certificate, which prevented his appointment. The petitioner relied on a prior order of a Co‑ordinate Bench dated 26 July 2021, affirmed by a Division Bench on 25 November 2021, which directed provisional appointment when verification was delayed. The State argued that the matter was pending before the Division Bench and sought more time. The Court held that the earlier precedent was binding and ordered the respondents to grant provisional appointment within three months, subject to the Scrutiny Committee’s final determination on the certificate’s genuineness. If the certificate is later found genuine, the petitioner will enjoy seniority and continuity of service; if not, the provisional appointment will be terminated.
Issues considered
- Whether the State is obligated to grant provisional appointment when the Scrutiny Committee does not verify the caste certificate within a reasonable time.
- Whether the earlier order of the Co‑ordinate Bench, affirmed by the Division Bench, is binding on the present petition.
- What are the consequences for the petitioner if the caste certificate is later declared not genuine?
Subjects
- caste certificate verification
- provisional appointment
- Scrutiny Committee
- Lok Rakshak
- Police Constable appointment
- precedent binding
- service continuity
Judgment
C/SCA/4740/2026 ORDER DATED: 09/04/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4740 of 2026
==========================================================
JAYESHKUMAR DEVABHAI MUCHHAL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance :
MR. RAVI L. GARCHAR for the Petitioner.
MR PARTH PATEL, AGP for the Respondents.
=========================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 09/04/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Ravi Garchar on behalf of
the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader on behalf
of the respondent – State.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP waives service
of rule on behalf of the Respondents.
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
certi1cate issued in favour of the petitioner, which has led to the
petitioner who was selected as Lok Rakshak – Police Constable,
Class - III, but not getting appointment.
4. Learned Advocate Mr. Ravi Garchar would draw the
attention of this Court to an order of learned Co-ordinate Bench
dated 26.07.2021 which has been con1rmed by Hon’ble Division
Bench vide an order dated 25.11.2021 and whereas learned
Page 1 of 4
C/SCA/4740/2026 ORDER DATED: 09/04/2026
Advocate would submit that in a similar scenario, since the
Scrutiny Committee had not veri1ed the caste certi1cate 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 clari1ed that if the caste certi1cate of the petitioner was
found not to be genuine, the petitioner would not be entitled to
bene1t of provisional appointment. It was further clari1ed that if
the caste certi1cate 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 bene1ts.
4.1 Learned Advocate Mr. Ravi Garchar 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, con1rming the order of the
Hon’ble Division Bench. Learned Advocate Mr. Ravi Garchar 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 appearing for
the respondents while he could not dispute the fact about orders
being passed by the learned Co-ordinate Bench and whereas the
same being con1rmed by Hon’ble Division Bench, would submit
that the State is contemplating to have a comprehensive exercise
Page 2 of 4
C/SCA/4740/2026 ORDER DATED: 09/04/2026
more particularly considering the fact that certain aspects of the
issue in dispute are pending before the Hon’ble Division Bench.
They 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 con1rmed 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 con1rmed 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 post of Lok Rakshak – Police Constable, Class-III, subject to the
1nal decision taken by the Scrutiny Committee. Such order shall be
issued by the respondents within a period of three months from the
date of receipt of writ of this order.
8. It is clari1ed that in case the Scrutiny Committee
comes to a conclusion before the period of three months that the
caste certi1cate 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 clari1ed
that before 1nally deciding as to the genuineness of the caste
certi1cate all procedure as contemplated under the law shall be
followed by the respondents.
Page 3 of 4
C/SCA/4740/2026 ORDER DATED: 09/04/2026
8.1 It is further clari1ed that in case the Scrutiny
Committee does not take any decision as regards the genuineness
of the caste certi1cate then provisional appointments shall be
issued to the petitioners 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 certi1cate of the
petitioner then
(A) in case if the caste certi1cate 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 certi1cate is found to be genuine then it will
be open for the petitioner to claim seniority and all other bene1ts
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. 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 09/04/2026 18:00:07
Page 4 of 4
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.