SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(Bom) 2144

S.V.GANGAPURWALA, A.M.BADAR
Laxman – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : S.S. Patil
For the Respondents: A.V. Gondhalekar, Additional Government Pleader

JUDGMENT

S.V. Gangapurwala, J.

1. Heard. The unsuccessful candidate in the selection process conducted by respondent Nos. 2 to 4 for the post of Chief Engineer is before the Court.

2. Mr. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contends that the necessary experience and qualification for the post of Chief Engineer which is to be filled in by direct recruitment is laid down in the advertisement itself. As per the advertisement the candidate shall possess 15 years experience in power sector, out of which at least five years in the area of power generation in selection post like Executive Engineer and above out of which one year in the position of Superintending Engineer and above or three years in the position of Superintending Engineer and above.

3. The respondent No. 5 who is selected in the said selection process pursuant to the advertisement does not possess 15 years experience in power sector. The learned counsel submits that respondent No. 5 was appointed with respondent Nos. 2 to 4 in the year 2003. 15 years experience as laid down was required to be possessed




























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top