B.P. COLABAWALLA, J.

1. The present Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a suitable writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the order/opinion dated 25th June, 2012 recorded by Respondent No.1 and thereafter for a direction that the Petitioner be appointed to the post of Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate, First Class. It is the Petitioner's case that despite the Petitioner being a recommended candidate at Sr.No.41 in the merit list, Respondent No.1 has recorded that having regard to the nature of allegations leveled against the Petitioner, the reasons stated in the judgment and the nature of duties to be entrusted to him, the Hon'ble Administrative Judges' Committee has decided not to recommend the name of the Petitioner for judicial service.

2. The facts on the basis of which the challenge is made by the Petitioner, are as follows:-

(a) The Petitioner is an individual who has passed his LL.B. Degree in the year 2004 and thereafter was enrolled as an Advocate with the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa. He is a practicing Advocate in the District Court at Nanded. Respondent No.1 is the High Court of Bombay through the Registrar General and Respondent No.2 is the State of Maharashtra through the Department of Law and Judiciary.

(b) It is the case of the Petitioner that the Maharashtra Public Service Commission (for short, the “MPSC”) had issued an advertisement dated 11th April, 2011 for recruitment to the post of Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate, First Class. As the Petitioner was eligible, the Petitioner applied for the said post pursuant to the aforesaid advertisement. Thereafter, the Petitioner appeared in the preliminary examination and after having qualified in the same, the Petitioner appeared in the written examination held on 21st August 2011.

(c) It is the case of the Petitioner that he successfully passed the said written examination. In view of his passing the written examination, the MPSC called the Petitioner for viva voce. Thereafter, the MPSC, on the basis of the marks secured by the candidates, prepared an order of merit of the candidates eligible for appointment. The name of the Petitioner was at Sr.No.41 in this order of merit.

(d) The MPSC thereafter also addressed a letter dated 31st January, 2012 to the Petitioner intimating him that his name is recommended to Respondent No.2 for the aforesaid post. By the said letter, the Petitioner was further called upon to fill in the attestation form with the requisite information. This was duly done by the Petitioner on 8th February 2012. Clause 11 of the attestation form required the Petitioner to furnish information as to whether he has been arrested/prosecuted/kept under detention or bound down/fined/ convicted by a Court of Law. Accordingly, the Petitioner supplied the particulars of the criminal case lodged against him which had resulted finally in an acquittal vide its judgment dated 29th May, 2002.

(e) Thereafter, the Petitioner received a letter from Respondent No.2 specifically intimating him that the MPSC has recommended the Petitioner's name for the said post and accordingly called upon the Petitioner to submit his medical certificate. Accordingly, the medical examination of the Petitioner was fixed on 12th March, 2012 and the Petitioner underwent the necessary medical examination. Thereafter, the list of appointed candidates was declared vide a Notification dated 7th December, 2012 wherein the name of the Petitioner was not mentioned/included. It is in these circumstances that the Petitioner applied under the Right to Information Act, 2005 when he was furnished a copy of the order/opinion rendered by the Hon'ble Administrative Judges' Committee of this Court on 25th June, 2012 (the impugned opinion). It is in these peculiar facts and circumstances that the opinion of the Hon'ble Administrative Judges' Committee dated 25th June, 2012 has been assailed in the present Writ P