Bombay High Court
Mayur Digambar Vispute vs The State Of Maharashtra Through The ... on 30 January, 2024
Author: Ravindra V. Ghuge
Bench: Ravindra V. Ghuge
2024:BHC-AUG:2423-DB
67-WP-1082-2024.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 1082 OF 2024
MAYUR DIGAMBAR VISPUTE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
....
Mr. M. R. Sonawane, Advocate for Petitioner
Mr. S. K. Tambe, AGP for Respondent - State
Mr. A. B. Kadethankar, Advocate for Respondent - MHADA
....
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND
Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.
DATE : 30.01.2024
PER COURT :-
1. The Petitioner has put forth prayer clause [B] as
under:-
"[B] To issue Writ of Mandamus or any other writ or direction in the
like nature, the respondents may kindly be directed to include the name
of petitioner in the final Select list prepared for the candidates for
appointment to the post of Junior clerk cum Typist Assistance on
establishment of the respondent no.2 in pursuance to the Advertisement
dated 17.09.2021 by deciding the representations dated 02.02.2023 and
02.12.2023, in view of the decision of this Hon'ble court dated 7.11.2023
in writ petition no. 10055/2022 and for that purpose issue necessary
directions."
2. The learned Advocate Shri Kadethankar has
vehemently opposed this Petition.
1 of 3
(( 2 )) 67-WP-1082-2024
3. In a similar group of cases, we have delivered a detailed
judgment running into 14 pages, on 07.11.2023 in Writ Petition No.
10055 of 2022 (Yogesh Suppadsing Bamhnavat Vs. The State of
Maharashtra and others) and connected Writ Petitions. This
Petitioner is one of those Petitioners, who appeared for the
examination, held as a part of the selection process by Respondent
No.2/MHADA, for filling up of the posts of Junior Clerk-cum-Typist.
It is undisputed that the Petitioner, as like those Petitioners, is in the
merit list. Issuance of appointment orders for the said posts, has
already commenced.
4. The ground raised by the Maharashtra Housing and Area
Development Authority (MHADA) is that, the present Petitioner, along
with 60 examinees, purportedly indulged in unfair exam practices
and the first information report dated 07.12.2022 bearing
No.1015/2022 is registered against them at Police Station Kherwadi,
District Brihan Mumbai City.
5. It is undisputed that the Petitioner had gone to the
washroom, well before entering the examination hall. After the
examination commenced, he did not leave the examination hall even
2 of 3
(( 3 )) 67-WP-1082-2024
to drink a drop of water. He did not visit the washroom. He was in
the examination hall in his chair for the entire 120 minutes duration
of the examination. It is undisputed that he has himself answered the
questions and there is no allegation of a proxy candidate.
6. In view of our conclusions in our order dated 07.11.2023,
in the case of Yogesh (supra), the conclusions in paragraph 18 and 20
of the said order would squarely apply to the case of the present
Petitioner.
7. In view of the above, this Petition filed by Mayur
Digambar Vispute is partly allowed. We direct Respondent No.2
MHADA, to consider the candidature of the present Petitioner in their
recruitment process and based on his rank in the order of merit and
the availability of posts, he may be considered by following the due
procedure applicable to the said recruitment process, in the event
there is no other legal impediment in the path of the Petitioner.
[ Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J. ] [ RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. ]
SMS
3 of 3
