C/SCA/14582/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/11/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14582 of 2025 ========================================================== RIPINKUMAR JIVANBHAI MAKWANA Versus DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER & ORS. ========================================================== Appearance: MR HIMANISH J JAPEE(11295) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MITUL GAUTAM AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3 KAASH K THAKKAR(7332) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,4 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI Date : 28/11/2025 ORAL ORDER 1. Heard learned advocate Mr.H.J.Japee for the petitioner. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following relief; “a. Your Lordships may be pleased to allow this petition. b. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction of this honourable court and be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to treat the petitioner in Class-III from his initial date of appointment which is 09.05.2007 and be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to forthwith release the arrears of salary, modify the seniority and grant deemed date of promotion and all other consequential benefits. Page 1 of 6 C/SCA/14582/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/11/2025 c. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction of this honourable court and be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to treat the petitioner in Class-III from his initial date of appointment which is 09.05.2007 and be pleased direct the respondent authorities to forthwith release the arrears of salary, modify the seniority and grant deemed date of promotion and all other consequential benefits, pending, admission, hearing and final disposal of the present petition. d. Your Lordships may be pleased to grant any other relief/s as may deem fit proper, in the interest of justice.” 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner's father namely Jivanbhai Kashanabhai Makwana who was serving as under D.D.O. Anand as an Assistant Teacher on a permanent post and as he died on 08-12-2002, the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment within period of 6 months from the death of his father. The record indicates that the petitioner's application was processed and, time and again, the petitioner was asked to produce the CIC certificate, which the petitioner could not produce, and ultimately, vide communication dated 06-03-2007, the petitioner addressed a letter to the Section Officer, Panchayat, Rural Housing and Rural Development Department, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar, with a copy of the said C/SCA/14582/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/11/2025 communication sent to the D.D.O., Anand. In the said communication, the petitioner has categorically stated that in view of the letter written by the concerned Section Officer on 20-02-2007, as the petitioner had not passed the CIC examination and therefore is not in a position to provide the certificate, he should be given appointment in Class IV, which would indicate that though the petitioner had initially applied or opted for a Class III post, on account of his failure to provide the certificate of passing the CIC examination, the petitioner showed his willingness to seek compassionate appointment on a Class IV post. 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid letter written by the petitioner dated 06-03-2007, upon receipt of the said letter, the D.D.O., Anand also wrote a letter to the Section Officer, Panchayat, Rural Housing and Rural Development Department on 16-03- 2007 and recommended the case of the petitioner. 4. Thereafter, on 09-05-2007, the Panchayat, Rural Housing and Rural Development Department of the State addressed a communication to the D.D.O., a copy of which was sent to the petitioner, whereby approval was given to appoint the petitioner on a Class IV post on a purely ad-hoc basis with a fixed salary of Rs. 1,500/-, and pursuant thereto, on 14-06- C/SCA/14582/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/11/2025 2007, the petitioner was appointed to the post of Peon in the Taluka Panchayat, Anand. The record indicates that the petitioner never challenged the aforesaid action or order dated 14-06-2007 and joined the services of the respondents. Learned Advocate, Mr. Jaypee submitted that the petitioner's actual entitlement was to a Class III post and that the relevant policy prevailing at the time of the petitioner's father's death for compassionate appointment did not require the petitioner to possess a CIC certificate. Therefore, the petitioner was wrongly appointed to a Class IV post, and although the petitioner ultimately received promotion to Class III in 2018, his career was delayed by a period of 11 years despite his original entitlement to appointment on a Class III post. Hence, interference of this Court was called for by filing this petition with a prayer to direct the respondents by issuing suitable directions, which have already been incorporated in the foregoing paragraph. 5. The aforesaid prayer cannot be considered at all and is required to be out-rightly rejected by imposing heavy costs, for the simple reason that it was on the petitioner's own request, made vide communication dated 06-03-2007, that the petitioner stated that he was not in a position to produce the CIC certificate as he had not passed the examination, and C/SCA/14582/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/11/2025 therefore he was ready and willing to accept a job on a Class IV post. The aforesaid communication of the petitioner was processed, and as the petitioner had given up his right to be appointed on a Class III post, he was accordingly appointed on a Class IV post. Now, after having served on a Class IV post for a period of 11 years from 2007 to 2018 and after having obtained promotion to a Class III post in 2018, after period of seven years, this petition has been filed. Therefore, when the petitioner had not objected to, and had rather given up, his right to be appointed on a Class III post, and when it was upon the petitioner’s own request that he was given compassionate appointment on a Class IV post, such a petition is not required to be entertained. 6. Further, when the petitioner has never served on a Class III post for the period from 14-06-2007 till 2018, i.e., the date on which the petitioner was promoted to a Class III post, the petitioner’s case cannot be considered for appointment to a Class III post retrospectively, when the petitioner has not served on that post for a period of 11 years. Therefore, in making such a prayer, despite knowing fully well that the petitioner had already given up his right to be considered for a Class III post as far back as on 06-03-2007, and that on that basis alone the petitioner’s case was considered and he was C/SCA/14582/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/11/2025 appointed on a Class IV post, this Court would have dismissed the petition by imposing heavy costs; however, at this juncture, as learned advocate Mr.Jaypee has requested that no cost be imposed on the petitioner, the Court has restrained itself from imposing costs. Accordingly, for the reasons stated hereinabove, the petition is required to be dismissed and the same is dismissed. No order as to costs. (NIRZAR S. DESAI,J) BHAVIN MEHTA Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE I, at High Court of Gujarat on 28/11/2025 17:48:10