Important Point - It is trite law that a mere selection of a candidate would not vest a right in such candidate to seek an appointment.

Ravindra V. Ghuge, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by the consent of the parties.

2. We have considered the submissions of the learned senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos.1 to 4 Union Territory of Dadra & Nagar Haveli (hereinafter referred to as U.T.) and the counsel representing Respondent No. 5 Union of India. With their assistance we have gone through the Petition paper-book and the record available.

3. The Petitioner in this Petition has put forth his prayers in paragraph 47 in terms of clauses (b) and (c) as under :-

(b) to direct the Respondents to forthwith issue letter of appointment in favour of the Petitioner thereby appointing the Petitioner to the post in issue i.e. Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector in the Transport Department of the Union Territory of Dadra & Nagar Haveli w.e.f. date of result of the Written Examination i.e. w.e.f. 11/7/2015;

(c) to direct the Respondents to disburse to the Petitioner entire amount towards back wages admissible to the post in issue i.e. Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector in the Transport Department of the Union Territory of Dadra & Nagar Haveli w.e.f. the date of result of Written Examination i.e. w.e.f. 11/7/2015 till the date of issuance of appointment letter;

4. The first objection raised by the Respondent is to the maintainability of this Petition on the basis of an alternate remedy. It is contended that since the petitioner is seeking an appointment in the service of the Respondent Union Territory, he would first have to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 and he is precluded from approaching this Court directly. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and Another vs. Subhas Sharma (2002) 4 SCC 145. The Petitioner submits that after the entire selection process has been completed, the Respondent U.T. has issued appointment order to the candidate at Serial No.2 in the combined merit list. Yet the Petitioner who is at Serial No.1 has not been appointed.

5. We have considered the submissions and have gone through the report cited. There is no dispute that by way of an alternate remedy, the Petitioner could have approached the Administrative Tribunal. However, keeping in view that the High Court is not precluded from taking up a grievance despite an alternate remedy being available and in the light of the peculiar facts of this case, we thought it fit to entertain this Petition. Reasons thereof are found in our conclusions that follow.

6. After considering the extensive submissions of the learned counsel, we find that the following factors are undisputed :-

(a) An advertisement was published on 25.10.2014 inviting applications for two posts of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector in the Administration of Dadra and Nagar Haveli (hereinafter referred to as the Respondent U.T.).

(b) The said posts fall under group 'C'.

(c) One post was available for the candidates from the open category and one post was reserved for the Scheduled Tribe category.

(d) The advertisement clearly mentions “Any Indian citizen can apply for the post. However, applicant having domicile of Dadra & Nagar Haveli shall be given weightage in accordance with O.M. No. I-12(B54)/2012ADM/1261 dated 26.12.2013 subject to him/her producing Domicile Certificate issued by Mamlatdar, Silvassa/Khanvel”.

(e) The presidential order placed on record bearing No. CO 65 mentions as under:-

THE CONSTITUTION (DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI) SCHEDULED TRIBES ORDER, 1962

(C.O. 65)

In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1) of article 342 of the Constitution of India, the President is pleased to make the following Order, namely:-

1. This Order may be called the Constitution (Dadra and Nagar Haveli) Scheduled Tr