IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.9560 of 2025 ========================================= RANJITBHAI NARANBHAI PATEL Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. ========================================= Appearance : MR DHRUV THAKKAR WITH MR DARSHAN K KOTHARI & MS. RAJESHWARI L MITTAL for the Petitioner. DS AFF. NOT FILED (N) for the Respondent Nos.3,4,5 MS AISHWARYA CHAUDHARY, AGP for the Respondent Nos.1,2 ========================================= CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI Date : 16/03/2026 ORAL ORDER 1. At the outset, learned advocate Mr. Dhruv Thakkar draws attention of this Court to the prayers made in this petition, which are as under :- “(A) Admit and allow this petition; (B) To issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to comply with the various Government Resolutions issued by Finance Department and extend the benefits to regularize the service of the petitioner and direct to grant consequential benefits; (C) To issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, p. 2 order or direction, directing the respondent to regularize the service of the petitioner from the date of his eligibility and grant all the consequential benefits including regular pay-scale, arrears, higher pay scale; (D) Pending Admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition direct the respondent to not terminate the petitioner from his service; (E) Pending Admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition direct the respondent authorities to grant the minimum pay scale as per the various Government Resolutions. (F) To pass such other and further relief/s that may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;” 2. Learned advocate Mr. Thakkar, under instructions, states that considering the fact that respondent No.5 – Shree Akhandvidhya Aryanak Gurukul Uttar Buniyadi Ashram Shala has already made a representation on 8.11.2023 to regularize the appointment of the present petitioner, and if at this juncture, the respondents are directed to decide the aforesaid representation, the grievance of the petitioner would be redressed to some extent at this stage. 3. Considering the above innocuous prayer, the respondent No.2 is directed to decide the representation dated p. 3 8.11.2023 made by the respondent No.5 by passing a reasoned order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. 4. With the above observations and directions, the petition stands disposed of. It is made clear that this Court has not examined the merits of the case. (NIRZAR S. DESAI,J) SAVARIYA