Shailesh Yashwant Chaudhari vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 5100 Bom

                                           1                     W.P.No.10874/15

                                          UNREPORTED




                                                                           
                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT




                                                   
                                          BOMBAY

                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD.




                                                  
                              WRIT PETITION NO.10874 OF 2015.


              Shailesh S/o Yeshwant Chaudhari,
              Age 23 years, Occ.Education,




                                        
              R/o Plot No.76, Near
              Sambhappa Colony,Chittod Road,
                             
              Dhule, Dist.Dhule.            ... Petitioner.
                            
                               Versus

              1. The State of Maharashtra,
              through it's Secretary,
      

              The Education and Sport
              Department, Mantralaya,
              Mumbai.
   



              2. The State of Maharashtra,
              through it's Secretary,
              The Home Department,





              Mantralaya, Mumbai.

              3. The Assistant Director,
              The Sports and Youth
              Services, Maharashtra, Pune.





              4. The Maharashtra Public Service
              Commission, Bank of India
              Building, 2nd floor, Mahatma
              Gandhi Road, Hutatma Chowk,
              Mumbai.                       ... Respondents.


                                        ...

              Mr.K.N.Shermale, advocate for the petitioner.
              Mr.B.V.Virdhe, A.G.P. for the State.




    ::: Uploaded on - 02/09/2016                   ::: Downloaded on - 03/09/2016 00:37:25 :::
                                                  2                         W.P.No.10874/15

                                             ...




                                                                                      
                                        CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA AND
                                                K.L.WADANE,JJ.

Date : 31.08.2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S.V.Gangapurwala,J.)

1. Heard.

2. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With

the consent of the parties, the petition is taken

up for final hearing.

3. Mr.Shermale, learned counsel for the

petitioner states that the petition is filed

against the order dated 16.6.2015, stating that

the petitioner is not entitled for the

reservation of 5% in Sports category for the post

of Sub-Inspector as per the Government Resolution

dated 20.9.2013. The petitioner is not qualified

for the post of B category. The learned counsel

submits that the petitioner is duly selected for

the post of Sub-Inspector by following due

procedure of law.

4. Earlier the candidature of the

petitioner was rejected on the ground that the

certificate issued to the petitioner is prior to

the issuance of Government Resolution. This

Court had set aside the said order and held that

the said Government Resolution would apply with

retrospective effect. Now it is rejected on the

ground that the candidates who participated in

the tournament conducted by the Association of

Indian Universities are qualified for the post of

C and D category and not for B category.

Learned counsel submits that the Respondents have

issued Government Resolution on 1.7.2016 stating

that the sports Mallakhamb is brought in category

B of Indian Universities level. As such the

petitioner would be entitled for the benefit of

said Government Resolution. The petitioner has

secured second position in the tournament

conducted at the All India Universities Level in

Mallakhamb.

5. Learned A.G.P. states that on the

relevant date, the petitioner was not eligible.

The benefit of the Government Resolution dated

1.7.2016 would not be available to the

petitioner.

6. We have considered the submissions.

This Court while interpreting the Government

Resolution dated 20.9.2013, has held that the

same applies even for the participation in the

tournaments conducted prior to issuance of the

Government Resolution.

7.

Vide Government Resolution dated

1.7.2016, the tournaments conducted at All India

Inter-Universities Level is brought in category

B. The condition is that the person representing

the University should stand in first, second or

third position. The certificate produced shows

participation of the petitioner in Mallakhamb

sports recognised by the said Government

Resolution at All India Universities Competition.

The petitioner would be entitled for the benefit

of the Government Resolution dated 1.7.2016.

8. Considering above, the impugned order

is quashed and set aside and the certificate of

the petitioner shall be considered afresh

considering the petitioner's participation in

Mallakhamb sports at All India Universities Level

in category B.

9. Rule accordingly made absolute in above

terms. No costs.

                      Sd/-                                Sd/-
                (K.L.WADANE,J.)                  (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.)
                             
              asp/office/wp10874.15