Bombay High Court
Nilesh Narendra Khairnar vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 23 February, 2021
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala, Shrikant Dattatray Kulkarni
1 980-wp-3000-20.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
980 WRIT PETITION NO.3000 OF 2020
NILESH NARENDRA KHAIRNAR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Shri M. V. Ghatge
Addl. G.P. for Respondents No. 1, 2 and 3: Shri S. B. Yawalkar
Advocate for Respondent No. 6 : Shri R. V. Gore
Advocate for Respondent No. 7 : Shri P. S. Paranjape
...
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.
DATE : 23rd FEBRUARY, 2021
...
PER COURT :
1. Though respondents No. 4 and 5 are served, none appear for
respondents No. 4 and 5.
2. We have heard Mr. Ghatge for the petitioner, Mr. Yawalkar, the
learned Additional Government Pleader for respondents No. 1, 2 and
3, Mr. Gore, the learned Advocate appears for respondent No. 6 and
Mr. Paranjape, the learned Advocate appears for respondents No.7.
3. Upon hearing the learned Advocates for the parties and going
through the pleadings, it appears that the petitioner is an unfortunate
candidate.
2 980-wp-3000-20.odt
4. The petitioner secured 164 marks in TAIT examination. The
petitioner is topper in the merit list. The petitioner had applied from
the other backward class category for the subject political science. It
appears that the said list was revised after the judgment delivered by
this Court at Nagpur.
5. The gamut of the petitioner's case is that though respondents
No. 4 to 6 had secured less marks than the petitioner, they were
given the appointment orders. Considering the marks obtained by the
petitioner, the petitioner has secured more marks even from the
general (open) category candidate. As per the advertisement, 28
posts were reserved for OBC category. From the said 28, 18 posts
were reserved for persons claiming horizontal reservations. General
category candidates have 119 posts. According to the petitioner, as
the petitioner was topping the merit list, the petitioner could have
been considered for the appointment either from open (general)
category or OBC category.
6. The case of the respondents appears to be that the petitioner
has given only one preference and as per the preference, the post
was meant for differently abled persons i.e. it was reserved for
persons claiming horizontal reservation.
3 980-wp-3000-20.odt
7. Mr. Paranjape, the learned Advocate for respondent No. 7
institution submits that respondent No. 5 did not join and he has
communicated that he is not interested. According to the learned AGP
and Mr. Paranjape, the learned Advocate for respondent No.7, the last
date for joining was 15/02/2020.
8. Mr. Yawalkar, the learned Additional Government Pleader affirms
that he has received communication from the Administrative Officer
(Establishment) of Commissionerate of Education, Pune that
respondent No. 5 who was appointed from OBC (physically
handicapped) category did not join.
9. The petitioner had also applied from OBC category. It appears
that the anomalous and chaotic situations has arisen because the
petitioner has given one preference hoping that as he has topped the
merit list, he would get appointment at any place.
10. As respondent No. 5 has not joined, that post remained vacant.
The petitioner can be accommodated on the said post.
11. In light of the aforesaid facts, the petitioner shall be
accommodated with respondent No. 7 -institution as an Assistant
4 980-wp-3000-20.odt
Teacher (Higher Secondary) for the subject Political Science for XI
and XII Standard.
12. We have passed the aforesaid order, as respondent No. 5 has
not joined the said post and that the petitioner has topped the merit
list from all categories.
13. The learned Additional Government Pleader has placed the
communications on record. The same are marked as 'X' and 'X1' for
identification.
14. Writ Petition accordingly disposed of. No costs.
(SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)
shp/-
