2903WP3621.13-Judgment 1/6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 3621 OF 2013
PETITIONER :- Pawan s/o Mukundrao Mhaske, Aged about
27 years, Occ.:Unemployed, R/o. At & Post:
Murmadi, Tq. Lakhni, Dist. Bhandara.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS :- 1) The Collector and President, District
Selection Committee, Bhandara.
2) Chief Executive Officer and Member, District
Selection Committee, Bhandara.
3) Executive Engineer (PWD) and Member-
Secretary, District Selection Committee,
Bhandara.
4) Shri Prateek Shivkumar Shahare, Aged
about Adult, Occ : Arekhak, Zilla Parishad,
Bhandara.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr.L.H.Kothari, counsel for the petitioner.
Ms N. P. Mehta, Asstt.Govt.Pleader for the respondent No.1
Mr. R.S.Khobragade, counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3.
Mr. V. D. Raut, counsel for the respondent No.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK &
MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI
, JJ.
DATED : 29.03.2017 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 selection list published by the District Selection Committee, Zilla Parishad, ::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2017 01:00:07 ::: 2903WP3621.13-Judgment 2/6 Bhandara. The petitioner has sought a direction against the respondent Nos.1 to 3 to appoint the petitioner on the post of arekhak/draftsman as the petitioner has secured the highest marks.
2. Zilla Parishad Bhandara published an advertisement on 28/05/2013 inviting applications from candidates desirous of seeking appointment on the posts mentioned in the advertisement, that included the post of a draftsman/arekhak. The petitioner applied in pursuance of the advertisement along with several others. The District Selection Committee conducted the written examination and the list of meritorious candidates was declared. The petitioner secured the highest marks in the written examination, i.e. 127.5 marks. The petitioner's documents were verified on 24/06/2013 and according to the District Selection Committee, the petitioner did not possess the requisite qualifications for appointment on the post of draftsman/ arekhak. According to the advertisement, a candidate possessing two years diploma in civil mechanical or electrical engineering from a government recognised institution or equivalent qualification was required to be possessed. According to the petitioner, the petitioner possessed the equivalent qualification as the petitioner had passed the higher secondary school certificate examination in M.C.V.C. course. Since the candidature of the petitioner was rejected by the District ::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2017 01:00:07 ::: 2903WP3621.13-Judgment 3/6 Selection Committee and the respondent No.4, the candidate, who was placed at Sr.No.2 in the merit list was appointed, the petitioner has filed the instant petition seeking a direction against the District Selection Committee to appoint the petitioner in the post of arekhak/draftsman.
3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the respondent Nos.1 to 3 had prescribed that the candidate should have possessed the secondary school certificate with two years diploma in civil mechanical or electrical engineering from a government recognised institute or an equivalent qualification. It is stated that since the petitioner has passed the higher secondary school certificate examination with M.C.V.C. course, the petitioner possesses the equivalent qualification. According to the petitioner, since the petitioner possesses the equivalent qualification, he is required to be selected for the post of arekhak/draftsman as he has admittedly secured the highest marks. It is stated that two years diploma of the industrial training institute is equivalent to the two years certificate course in M.C.V.C. It is stated that the examination in the industrial training institute diploma course is conducted by the board of industrial training institute whereas the examination in M.C.V.C. course is conducted by the Maharashtra State Higher Secondary Board of Education. According to the petitioner, since the qualification possessed by the petitioner is ::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2017 01:00:07 ::: 2903WP3621.13-Judgment 4/6 equivalent to the qualification prescribed in the advertisement, the respondent Nos.1 to 3 were obliged to select the petitioner for the post of arekhak.
4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 has seriously opposed the prayers made in the petition. It is submitted that the petitioner does not possess the qualification that is equivalent to the qualification of two years diploma in mechanical or electrical engineering from a recognised institution in the State of Maharashtra. It is submitted that the petitioner has passed the higher secondary school certificate examination with M.C.V.C. course. It is stated that the diploma examination is conducted by the industrial training institute recognised by the government whereas the higher secondary school certificate examination with the M.C.V.C. course is conducted by the Maharashtra State Higher Secondary Board of Education. It is submitted that since the respondent No.4 was placed at Sr.No.2 in the merit list and the petitioner was ineligible, the respondent No.4 was rightly selected and appointed on the post of arekhak. The learned Assistant Government Pleader sought for the dismissal of the writ petition.
::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2017 01:00:07 :::
2903WP3621.13-Judgment 5/6
5. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted. The advertisement clearly stipulates that for the post of arekhak, the candidate should have passed the secondary school certificate examination and should possess two years diploma in mechanical or electrical engineering from the institute recognised by the State of Maharashtra or should possess an equivalent qualification. The petitioner has only passed the higher secondary school certificate examination with M.C.V.C. course. What is sought by the advertisement is two years diploma in mechanical or electrical engineering or an equivalent qualification. The petitioner has not placed any material on record to show that equivalence is granted either by the State Government or by any competent authority to the two courses i.e. the diploma in mechanical or electrical engineering and the M.C.V.C. course. All the respondents have seriously disputed the claim of the petitioner in respect of equivalence. It would not be proper for this court in exercise of the writ jurisdiction to hold that one course is equivalent to another, when the authority competent to hold so, has not declared as such. The government resolution dated 12/08/2010 on which the petitioner has placed reliance does not refer to the subjects in which the petitioner has passed the M.C.V.C.course. Since the petitioner did not possess the requisite qualification, we do not find that the ::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2017 01:00:07 ::: 2903WP3621.13-Judgment 6/6 respondent No.2 has committed any error in refusing to select the petitioner for appointment to the post of arekhak. Further, we find that though the petitioner has joined the respondent No.4 as a party to the writ petition, the petitioner has not amended the prayer clause accordingly, challenging the appointment of the respondent No.4 to the post of arekhak. It appears that the respondent No.4 must be working on the post of arekhak for more than three years.
In this view of the matter, we dismiss the writ petition with no order as to costs. Rule stands discharged.
JUDGE JUDGE
KHUNTE
::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2017 01:00:07 :::