ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Ekrama Qureshi on behalf of the petitioner who by way of this petition inter alia challenges termination of services of the petitioner more particularly the petitioner working as Ad-hoc Lecturer in Government Polytechnic College, Ahmedabad for last 15 years.
2. Considering the submissions made by learned Advocate Mr. Qureshi more particularly the submission that respondents may consider appointing or availing the services of the petitioner either on the same post or any other vacant post to which the petitioner is qualified to hold/corresponding, the present petition in the considered opinion of this Court could be disposed of by directing the respondents to consider a representation which would be preferred by the petitioner for the very same issue.
3. Learned Advocate Mr. Qureshi and learned Advocate AGP Mr .Sahil Trivedi would not have any objection to such a course of action. Hence the
Page 1 of 2
following directions are passed:
[1] The petitioner to prefer a representation to the respondent no. 3 and respondent no. 2 for appointing the present petitioner to either the very post or any other vacant posts for holding which the petitioner is qualified.
[2] Upon such representation being made the same shall be considered by the respondents within a period of two weeks thereafter more particularly having regard to the fact that the petitioner has worked on the post in question for last 15 years.
[3] It would be open for the respondents to take an appropriate decision in accordance with law.
[4] In case the the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision it would be open for the petitioner to approach an appropriate forum in accordance with law.
With the above observations and directions, the present petition stands disposed of .
Needless to state that this Court has not observed anything on merits of the matter and.
Direct service is permitted.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
NIRU
Page 2 of 2