LOKESH KATARA V.s HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT December 14,2016

                                                                  REPORTABLE


                      IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                         CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION


                    WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 758 OF 2016




LOKESH KATARA AND ANR                  ..... PETITIONERS



                                   Versus



HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT         .....  RESPONDENT


                                  O R D E R



Dr D Y CHANDRACHUD, J

      These proceedings  have  been  instituted  under  Article  32  of  the
Constitution by two petitioners who are stated  to  be  working  as  Systems
Officers and Systems Assistants since 2009  on  a  contractual  basis.   The
petitioners state that Systems Officers and Systems Assistants were  engaged
in the High Court and the  district  courts  in  the  State  of  Gujarat  in
consonance with the National Policy and  Action  Plan  prepared  by  the  E-
Committee.  In 2013, the Government of Gujarat sanctioned posts  of  Systems
Officers and Systems Assistants in the  regular  cadre.   An  amendment  was
made to the recruitment rules in 2015 for filling up these posts  by  direct
recruitment.  The existing Systems Officers and Systems  Assistants  working
in  various  district  courts  submitted  a  representation  seeking   their
absorption.  An online skill test  was  conducted.   Another  representation
was submitted on 16 March 2016.  However, the representation for  absorption
was rejected on 26 May 2016.  On  9  September  2016  an  advertisement  was
published by the Registrar (Recruitment and Finance)  inviting  applications
for  thirty  posts  of  Systems  Officers  and  thirty  posts   of   Systems
Assistants.   The Writ Petition has been  instituted  seeking  to  challenge
the  advertisement  issued  by  the  High  Court  and  for  a  mandamus  for
incorporating a provision in the recruitment rules  for  the  absorption  of
the petitioners and similarly placed persons.

2     We are not inclined to entertain a Writ Petition under Article  32  of
the Constitution.  The petitioners have a remedy  available  of  moving  the
High Court on the judicial side under Article 226 of the  Constitution.   In
the circumstances, while leaving it open to  the  petitioners  to  institute
appropriate proceedings as they may be  advised,  we  decline  to  entertain
this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution.

3     The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed.



                 .........................................CJI
                                                  [T S  THAKUR]


      …..........................................J       [Dr D Y
CHANDRACHUD]



        …..........................................J
                                                     [L NAGESWARA RAO]



New Delhi
December 14,2016