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

2015 Supreme(Bom) 2331

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT NAGPUR BENCH
B.R. Gavai & P.N. Deshmukh, JJ.
Smt. Kanchan Vishwanath Jagtap and Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal and Ors. – Respondents
WRIT PETITION NO. 1925 OF 2014 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1930 OF 2014
Decided On : 16.12.2015.

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. M.M. Sudame, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. D.P. Thakre, Additional Government Pleader for Respondent Nos. 1 & 3.
Mr. N.D. Thombre, Advocate for Respondent No.14.
Mr. A.C. Dharmadhikari, Advocate for Respondent No.16.
Mr. N.S. Warulkar, Advocate for Intervener.

The reservation for women should be filled by women selected on merit within the vertical reservation quota. Reserved category candidates selected on their own merit should be treated as open competition candidates.

Headnote:

Reservation Policy - The court considered the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Rajesh Kumar Daria vs. Rajasthan Public Service Commission and held that the reservation for women should be filled by women selected on merit within the vertical reservation quota. The court also referred to the judgment in the case of Indra Sawhney vs. Union of India and held that reserved category candidates selected on their own merit should be treated as open competition candidates.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners challenged the order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal that set aside their selection for the posts of Deputy Director of Health Services and directed the Maharashtra Public Service Commission to prepare a fresh list of candidates from the category of Open (Female).

Finding of the Court:

The court considered the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Rajesh Kumar Daria vs. Rajasthan Public Service Commission and held that the reservation for women should be filled by women selected on merit within the vertical reservation quota. The court found that denying the meritorious reserved category women candidates the benefit of their merit would result in discriminatory treatment. The court also referred to the judgment in the case of Indra Sawhney vs. Union of India and held that reserved category candidates selected on their own merit should be treated as open competition candidates.

Ratio Decidendi: The reservation for women should be filled by women selected on merit within the vertical reservation quota. Reserved category candidates selected on their own merit should be treated as open competition candidates.

Result: The petitions were allowed and the order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal was set aside.

JUDGMENT :

B.R. Gavai, J.

1. The petitioners have approached this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 3.4.2014 passed by the learned Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur to the extent it sets aside the order dated 17.02.2011 vide which the petitioners in the present petitions are selected to the posts of Deputy Director of Health Services and the G.R. dated 5.12.2012 vide which the State Government has appointed these petitioners and further directing respondent- Maharashtra Public Service Commission to prepare fresh list of candidates to be called for interview from the category of Open (Female).

2. The facts in brief giving rise to the present writ petitions are as under:-

The State of Maharashtra had invited applications for the posts of Deputy Director of Health Services, Maharashtra Medical and Health Services Group A. In the advertisement , one post was shown reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Castes converted to Buddhisim, one was reserved for Nomadic Tribes (C) and two posts were shown available for open category, whereas two posts were reserved for ladies if available. The qualifications for all the posts was M.B.B.S. degree and Post-graduate degree or Postgraduate diploma. The experience requirement for open category was 20 years, for open categories ladies 7 years, for S.C. Category 18 years and 6 months and for N.T. (C ) Category 15 years in Class I post or in a post equivalent thereto of Health Administration, Medical relief or Family welfare under Government, Zilla Parishad or Local Bodies. In response to the advertisement, various candidates submitted their application forms including the petitioners herein. Insofar as the petitioner in Writ Petition No.1925 of 2014 is concerned, she had claimed reservation from S.C. as well as open female. Insofar as the petitioner in Writ Petition No.1930 of 2014 is concerned, though she belongs to O.B.C. category, she had applied against a post reserved for woman category.

3. The respondent- Maharashtra Public Service Commission (for short MPSC) after receipt of the applications, adopted a short listing criteria. In the short listing criteria, both the petitioners were found to be eligible and called for the interviews, along with the other candidates who were short-listed. The petitioners were found to be successful and as such in the select list published by the respondent-MPSC, their names were shown as selected candidates from women category. Being aggrieved by the selection of the petitioners, one Dr. Sadhana Bhaskar Joshi, (since deceased) respondent no.2 in Writ Petition No.1925 of 2014 and respondent No.3 in Writ Petition No.1930 of 2014 filed an original application before the learned Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur, being O.A. No.111 of 2011 challenging the selection and appointment of the petitioners from women category. Two other original applications were also filed by the candidates challenging selection and short-listing insofar as other categories are concerned. However, in the present writ petitions we are concerned only with the issue regarding the selection of the petitioners against the post reserved for women category.

4. The learned Tribunal vide the order impugned herein found that in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rajesh Kumar Daria vs. Rajasthan Public Service Commission and ors. reported in (2007) 8 Supreme Court Cases 785, the petitioners since they belonged to S.C. and O.B.C. categories, they were not eligible for competing from the open female category. The learned Tribunal found that all the candidates who were short-listed except one Lochana Raosaheb Ghodke who has intervened in Writ Petition No.1925 of 2014 could not have been permitted to compete for the said posts and, therefore, quashed and set aside the selection and appointment of the petitioners and directed fresh short-listing and fresh interviews to be conducted for the posts reserved for women, by considering only the candidates belongi




















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 Back to top