Bombay High Court
Savita Raju Mulange vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 1 November, 2017
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala
1 WP 11218-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 11218 OF 2014
Savita d/o Raju Mulange,
Age : 22 years, Occup: Education,
R/o Barad Tq. Mudkhed
District Nanded. .. Petitioner
VS.
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
School Education and Sports
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai -32 .
2. The Director,
Sports and Yough Services,
Central Building, 1st Floor,
Maharashtra State, Pune-01.
3. The Commissioner,
Nanded-Waghala City,
Municipal Corporation,
Nanded.
4. Maharashtra Tug of War Association,
255, B Ward, Racecourse Naka,
Sambhaji Nagar, Kolhapur -12.
Through its Secretary namely
Janardhan E. Gupile. .. Respondents
----
Mr. A. N. Nagargoje, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. S. W. Mundhe, AGP for respondents No.1 and 2.
Mr. M. D. Narwadkar, Advocate holding for Mr. M. V.
Deshpande, Advocate for respondent No.3.
Mr. B. B. Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent No.4.
----
2 WP 11218-2014
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI. JJ.
DATE : 01-11-2017
ORAL JUDGMENT ( Per Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi. J.)
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith with consent of
learned counsels for the parties, the petition is taken up for final
disposal at the admission stage.
2. The petitioner has challenged letter dated 27-08-2014
issued by respondent No.2 and also letter dated 09-10-2014 issued by
respondent No.3 by invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court. By
these letters the respondents have questioned the continuation of
appointment of the petitioner for the post of 'Clerk' with respondent
No.3.
3. It is not in dispute that, after undergoing due selection
process, the petitioner was selected as 'Clerk' from Other Backward
Classes (Sports) category on 20-05-2014. As per the procedure the
sports certificate was required to be verified by respondent No.2 and
after receipt of the verification report from the office of respondent
No.2, the appointment letter could have been issued to the petitioner.
In pursuance to the said procedure, respondent No.3 by letter dated
3 WP 11218-2014
26-05-2014 had asked the petitioner to submit original sports
certificate in order to get it verified from respondent No.2. The
petitioner submitted the required original sports certificate along with
application dated 02-06-2014 with respondent No.3. The respondent
No.2 conducted the inquiry in respect of her certificate and informed
respondent No.3 by letter dated 27-08-2014 that the petitioner is not
fulfilling criteria for the sportsman as the affiliation of the respondent
No.4 Association has been withdrawn on 11-07-2011 and the
petitioner's certificate was regarding the tournament held between 15 th
to 17th of July, 2011. Thereby the said letter dated 27-08-2014 the
respondent No.2 had turned down the claim of the petitioner in view
of the Government Resolution dated 30-12-2013. After receipt of the
said report, respondent No.3 cancelled the petitioner's selection for the
post of Clerk and issued letter in that regard on 09-10-2014.
Thereafter, the petitioner made representation on 11-10-2014 to the
respondent No.3 that her certificate regarding sportsman has been
discarded on technical ground and she would file appropriate
proceeding before the Court, till then her post should be kept vacant.
4. It is case of the petitioner that, in view of the Government
Resolutions dated 30-04-2005, 21-06-2006, 18-11-2006, 06-05-2008,
4 WP 11218-2014
21-08-2008, 07-05-2013 and 20-09-2013, the State Government has
laid down guidelines for giving reservation for the sportsman in the
Government employment. A detailed procedure has been laid down
regarding the same in Government Resolution dated 30-04-2005. The
petitioner's claim came to be turned down on the ground that the
respondent No.4 Association was not affiliated with the Indian
Olympic Association who had conducted the tournament. Though the
affiliation of near about 31 associations including respondent No.4
Association was withdrawn by the Indian Olympic Association vide its
letter dated 11-07-2011, still the said fact was not informed to the
concerned associations including respondent No.4. This fact can be
revealed from the Government Resolution dated 30-12-2013. The said
fact was also not informed to the State Authorities. Neither the
respondent No.4 nor the petitioner was aware about the withdrawal of
affiliation of 11-07-2011, and therefore, she had participated
bonafidely in that tournament. Under such circumstance the fact of
withdrawal of affiliation shall not affect.
5. Further, some of the candidates who had participated in
the tournament held after 11-07-2011 got appointments on the basis
of participation but petitioner who is similarly situated is deprived of
5 WP 11218-2014
getting the benefit. Her appointment is sought to be cancelled only on
technical ground which cannot be allowed.
6. Further now she has got her certificate verified during the
pendency of the petition. Accordingly, the respondent No.2 has again
verified the certificate and informed to respondent No.3 that the said
certificate is valid and she is fulfilling the criteria required for the post
of Class 'C' and 'D' vide letter dated 13-04-2016. On the basis of these
contentions, the petitioner has sought writ of certiorari or direction for
quashing and setting aside the impugned letters and appointing her for
the post which is reserved for which she has been selected.
7. Affidavit-in-reply has been filed by respondents No.2 and
3. They are not disputing that the petitioner was selected for the post
of 'Clerk' from sportsman category out of post reserved for Other
Backward Classes. The certificate produced by the petitioner was
forwarded for verification. The respondent No.2 has stated that,
Indian Olympic Association had withdrawn affiliation of certain
associations by letter dated 11-07-2011. Respondent No.4 was one of
the said associations. In order to secure the sportsman, from the loss
caused, due to de-recognition of National Federations, the Government
of Maharashtra issued Government Resolution dated 30-12-2013
6 WP 11218-2014
which prescribed cut off date to submit the spots certificate up to
28-02-2013. However, the certificate of the petitioner was submitted
to the office of respondent No.2 on or about 01-09-2014 wherein the
petitioner was held ineligible for the post of A, B, C and D categories
under sports quota. However, thereafter Maharashtra Olympic
Association vide its letter dated 19-05-2015 informed that,
Maharashtra Tug of War Association was affiliated to it since 08-02-
2009. Therefore the respondent No.2 reverified the sports certificate
and it was found correct. Therefore, as per the Government
Resolutions, the petitioner fulfills the criteria prescribed for group 'C
and D' posts.
8. In order to cut short, we would like to say that, all the
concerned counsels representing the respective parties submitted their
submissions in support of their respective contentions.
9. It is to be noted that, the certificate in respect of sport on
which the petitioner is relying, is in respect of the event that had taken
place between 15th to 17th July, 2011. The competition was organized
by Maharashtra Tug of War Association. The respondent No.3 had
asked the petitioner by its letter dated 26-05-2014 to submit her
documents. Accordingly, she produced the documents on 02-06-2014.
7 WP 11218-2014
The same was sent for verification to respondent No.2 vide letter dated
07-06-2014 by respondent No.3. By letter dated 27-08-2014
respondent No.2 informed respondent No.3 that the petitioner is not
fulfilling the criteria because the certificate is issued after 11-02-2011,
when in fact the affiliation of the association was cancelled by Indian
Olympic Association. The fact was informed to the petitioner by
respondent No.3 by letter dated 09-10-2014. The petitioner is
claiming the benefit given to a sports person under Government
Resolution dated 30-04-2005. However, thereafter one more
Government Resolution has been passed on 30-12-2013. By this
Government Resolution, the respondent No.1 State has accepted that
though the Indian Olympic Association had taken away the affiliation
from 11-02-2011, by letter dated 11-07-2011, yet the said fact was not
brought to the notice of the State as well as to the sport persons by the
association, and therefore, they participated in the competitions,
applied for the job within the 5 % reservations. The respondent No.2
came to know about the said fact and gave reply/ report while
submitting the verification. The said fact was brought to the notice of
respondent No.2 in February, 2013, and therefore, in order to save the
loss to the players/ sports persons, the Government Resolution dated
30-12-2013 came to be issued. The concerned departments who had
8 WP 11218-2014
given appointments/ recruited sports persons, who have taken part in
the sports after February 2011 which was organized by those
associations, whose affiliation has been withdrawn/ cancelled by the
Indian Olympic Association, were directed to resubmit the applications
for verifications before 01-03-2014.
10. Here in this case the petitioner cannot be deprived of the
benefit because she was in fact asked to submit her documents by the
respondent No.3 only on 26-05-2014. Further it is to be noted that, in
view of Government Resolution dated 30-12-2013, the verification has
been done and the fresh report has been given to respondent No.3 by
respondent No.2 on 13-04-2016 stating that, she is fulfilling the
criteria. The sports certificate of the petitioner is protected and valid
pursuant to the Government Resolution dated 30-12-2013.
11. In the above circumstances, the act of invalidating the
sports certificate by earlier communication by respondent No.2 on 27-
08-2014 and pursuant to the same the communication by respondent
No.3 to petitioner on 09-10-2014, appears to be unsustainable.
Having regard to the documents filed on record, we are satisfied that
the petitioner fulfills the criteria as prescribed under the Government
Resolution dated 30-04-2005, and thus, entitled to be selected from
9 WP 11218-2014
the category of sports person. We are, therefore, inclined to allow the
petition. Hence, following order.
O R D E R
1) The communication dated 27-08-2014 issued by
respondent No.2 to respondent No.3 is quashed and set
aside. Consequently the order/ letter issued by
respondent No.3 to the petitioner on 09-10-2014 is also
quashed and set aside.
2) The respondent No.3 is directed to issue
appointment letter to the petitioner as 'Clerk' in pursuance
to the selection list, if she otherwise fulfills the other
conditions.
3) Rule is made absolute in above terms with no order
as to costs.
[SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA]
JUDGE JUDGE
vjg/-.
