Archana D/O Pralhad Pande vs State Of Maharashtra Through Its ...

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 1079 Bom
Judgement Date : 27 March, 2017

Bombay High Court
Archana D/O Pralhad Pande vs State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 27 March, 2017
Bench: V.A. Naik
 2703WP5370.13-Judgment                                                                         1/3


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                      WRIT PETITION NO.  5370  OF    2013


 PETITIONER :-                        Archana D/o. Pralhad Pande, Aged about 33
                                      years,   Occ.   Service,   R/o.   Medical   College
                                      Quarters,   Type-4   Block-3,   Vasantrao   Naik
                                      Government   Medical   College   Campus,
                                      Yavatmal. 

                                         ...VERSUS... 

 RESPONDENTS :-                  1. State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary
                                    for   General   Administration   Department
                                    Mantralaya-Mumbai. 

                                 2. Chairman, District Selection Committee and
                                    District   Collector,   Yavatmal   District,
                                    Yavatmal. 

                                 3. Chief   Executive   Officer,   Zilla   Parishad,
                                    Yavatmal.   

                                 4. President, Zilla Parishad, Yavatmal. 

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Mr. S.A.Marathe, counsel for the petitioner.
   Mrs.A.R.Taiwade, Asstt.Govt.Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.
           Mr.R.D.Bhuibhar, counsel for the respondent Nos.3 and 4.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                        CORAM : SMT. VASANTI    A    NAIK & 
                                                    MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI
                                                                     ,   JJ.

DATED : 27.03.2017 O R A L J U D G M E N T (Per Smt.Vasanti A Naik, J.) By this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the action on the part of the respondents of filling the three posts of laboratory ::: Uploaded on - 30/03/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 31/03/2017 00:46:48 ::: 2703WP5370.13-Judgment 2/3 technicians in the zilla parishad in pursuance of the advertisement dated 23/09/2013 by appointment of scheduled tribes candidates.

2. According to the petitioner, since she belongs to the category of physically challenged, the respondents ought to have reserved one post of the three posts of laboratory technicians in the zilla parishad for a physically challenged candidate. It is stated that at the most, two posts of laboratory technicians could have been filled by appointment of the scheduled tribes candidates but the zilla parishad reserved all the three posts for the scheduled tribes. It is submitted that the respondent-zilla parishad has committed an error in not granting due weightage to the policy of reservation, specially the reservation meant for the physically challenged.

3. Mrs.Tiwari, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Shri Bhuibhar, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.3 and 4, state that though this court had not granted any interim relief in this writ petition in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner has not joined the candidates that are appointed on the posts of laboratory technicians in pursuance of the selection process conducted in the year 2013. It is stated that in the year 2014, again some posts of laboratory technicians were advertised and the petitioner applied in pursuance of the said advertisement but was not successful in securing the employment, as she was not selected. ::: Uploaded on - 30/03/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 31/03/2017 00:46:48 :::

2703WP5370.13-Judgment 3/3 It is stated that in the aforesaid set of facts, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

4. We are not inclined to grant the relief sought by the petitioner in the instant petition. Since we had not granted any interim relief in favour of the petitioner, all the posts that were advertised in the year 2013 were filled up by the selected candidates. The petitioner has not joined any of the candidates that were appointed on the posts of laboratory technicians in pursuance of the advertisement of the year 2013. It was necessary for the petitioner to have joined the appointed candidates as party respondents, as they would be seriously affected if we consider granting the relief in favour of the petitioner. Also, the petitioner had applied in pursuance of an advertisement issued by the zilla parishad in the year 2014, but since the petitioner did not achieve the benchmark, the petitioner's candidature was rejected. In this view of the matter, no relief could be granted in favour of the petitioner.

In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition stands dismissed with no order as to costs. Rule stands discharged.

                        JUDGE                                              JUDGE 

 KHUNTE




::: Uploaded on - 30/03/2017                                ::: Downloaded on - 31/03/2017 00:46:48 :::