Sanjaysinh Hemantsangh Chavda vs State Of Gujarat

Biren Vaishnav, J

By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the appointment order dated 24.07.2019 of the respondent no. 3 appointing him as Assistant Director of Information (Editorial), Class-II.

The case of the petitioner is that he has done his graduation in Arts. The petitioner was selected and appointed as Information Assistant Class-III on 21.05.2010. He was promoted as Senior Sub-Editor on 26.12.2018. An advertisement was issued on 05.11.2015 for direct recruitment to the post of Assistant Director of Information (Editorial), Class-II. The name of the petitioner was shown in waiting list of SEBC category whereas that of the respondent no. 3 was shown on select list and the appointment order dated 24.07.2019 was issued appointing respondent no. 3 on such post.

Ms. Harshal Pandya, learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the appointment of respondent no.3 on the ground that respondent no. 3 does not possess requisite experience. According to her experience gained after obtaining qualification has to be counted and not prior thereto. The respondent no. 3 had served as copy editor in TV9 and obtained a degree in July 2008. His experience is therefore two years and 3 months. He was also publishing weekly newspaper in the name of ‘Anjar Today’ in the capacity as editor. A weekly newspaper cannot be considered as a daily publication and was also not in the government or local body. The result of the journalism degree came in July 2008 and therefore the experience of respondent no. 3 cannot be counted from 10.01.2008. She would rely upon RTI communications which after thoughtful consideration removed the word ‘weekly newspaper’ from the rules for considering experience and therefore on this ground also the respondent no. 3 is not entitled for appointment. She relies on the following decisions:

(a) Ramjit Singh Kardam v. Sanjeev Kumar and others reported in AIR 2020 SC 2060

(b) Meeta Sahai v. State of Bihar reported in 2019(20) SCC 17

(c) Decision rendered in the case of Dr. Rachita Vijaykumar Jayswal in SCA No.8631/2020 dated 25.3.2022 of this Court

(d) Thorat Nayan Hemchandra v. State of Gujarat reported in 2016(4) GLR 3266 &

(e) Mukesh V. Chavda v. State of Gujarat reported in 2013(1) GLR 265.

Mr. Krutik Parikh, learned AGP for the state relies on the reply filed and would submit that rule 4b(i) and rule 4b(ii) read as under:

“4. To be eligible for appointment by direct selection to the post mentioned in Rule 2, a candidate shall;

(a) Not be more than 35 years of age:

Provided that the upper age limit may be relaxed in favour of a candidate who is already in the service of the Government of Gujarat in accordance with the provisions of the Gujarat Civil Services Classification and Recruitment (General) Rules, 1967;

(b) Possess: a post graduate diploma in Journalism and Mass Communication or a post graduate degree in Journalism and Mass Communication obtained from any of the Universities established or incorporated by or under the Central or a State Act in India, or any other educational institution recognized as such by the Government or declared to be deemed as University under section 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956; or possess an equivalent qualification recognized by the Government; and

(i) have about three years experience on the post not below the rank of Information Assistant, Class III, in the subordinate service of the Commissionerate of Information; or

(ii) have about three years combined or separate experience of Journalism or publicity or public relation work or organizing exhibition or editing a daily newspaper or electronic media or periodicals in the Government or Local Bodies or Government undertaking Board or Corporation or Limited Company established under the Companies Act, 1956 or public or private sector daily newspaper or news agency or electronic media or publicity organization on the post which can be considered equivalent to the post nor below the rank of Information Assistant, Class III, in the subordinate service of the Commissionerate of Information; or

(II) a degree in Journalism and Mass Communication or a degree in Journalism obtained from any of the Universities established or incorporated by or under the Central or a State Act in India; or any other educational institution recognized as such by the Government or declared to be deemed as University under section 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956; or possess an equivalent qualification recognized by the Government; and

(i) have about five years experience on the post not below the rank of Information Assistant, Class III, in the subordinate service of the Commissionerate of Information; or

(ii) have about five years combined or separate experience of Journalism or publicity or public relation work or organizing exhibition or editing a daily news paper or electronic media or periodicals in the Government or Local Bodies or Government undertaking Board or Corporation or Limited Company established under the Companies Act, 1956; or public or private sector daily newspaper or news Agency or electronic media or publicity organization on the post which can be considered equivalent to the post not below the rank of Information Assistant, Class III, in the subordinate service of the Commissionerate of Information.

(c) possess the basic knowledge of computer application as prescribed in the Gujarat Civil Services Classification and Recruitment (General) Rules, 1967.

(d) possess adequate knowledge of Gujarati or Hindi or both.”

Mr. Parikh, learned AGP would submit that editing work of ‘Anjar Today’ is considered valid for the post in question. Reliance on the advertisement is misconceived as the rules nowhere prescribe that the qualification prior to the course cannot be counted. Even otherwise, the respondent no. 3 after degree has three years and 11 months’ experience as under:

Sr.

No.

Name of the Institution

Experience

Duration of Experience

Year

Month

Day

1.

TV 9

07.07.2008 to 30.04.2010

1

09

23

2.

Anjar Today

01.10.2011 to 15.11.2013

2

1

15

Mr. D.A. Bambhania, learned advocate appearing for the private respondent apart from making legal submissions on whether the petitioner can challenge the selection process after participating in such a process and relying on the decisions cited hereinbelow submitted that the respondent no. 3 is qualified and has the requisite experience.

Considering the submissions made by learned counsels for the respective parties and on the basis of the affidavit in reply filed by the State and respondent no. 3 and on consideration of the relevant rules namely rule 4b, what is evident is that the respondent no. 3 has the kind of experience and the institution namely that in TV9 and ‘Anjar Today’ for a period of 3 years and 11 months. Reading the rules would indicate that the kind of experience that the candidate should possess and the organization is as under:

(A) EDITORIAL WORK:

(1) Journalism

(2) Publicity

(3) Public Relation Work

(4) Organization Exhibition

(5) Editing a Daily News Paper

(6) Electronic Media &

(7) Periodicals.

(B) ORGANIZATIONS:

(1) The Government

(2) Local Bodies

(3) Government Under Taking Board or Corporation

(4) Limited Company established under the Companies Act, 1956

(5) Public Sector Daily Newspaper

(6) Private Sector Daily Newspaper

(7) News Agency

(8) Electronic Media &

(9) Publicity Organization.

The rule nowhere stipulates that the experience has to be only in a daily newspaper. The rule is disjunctive inasmuch as it is preceded by the word ‘or’ in each of the criteria for experience.

For the foregoing reasons, petition is dismissed. No costs.