JUDGMENT :

Shailesh P. Brahme, J.

Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard both the sides finally at the admission stage with their consent.

2. Petitioner is challenging selection of respondent No.5 as Assistant Professor and seeking further directions to appoint him on the post of Assistant Professor by quashing the appointment of respondent No.5.

3. The petitioner and respondent No.5 belong to OBC category. They participated in the selection process for the post of Assistant Professor advertised by the Management on 17.09.2019. One of the conditions stipulated in the advertisement was, production of the original documents at the time of interview. They were interviewed on 05.02.2020 by a duly constituted selection committee. Petitioner secured 92 marks, whereas respondent No.5 secured 64 marks. The respondent No.5 was selected and appointed vide order dated 20.02.2020 as Assistant Professor.

4. Petitioner and other candidates submitted complaints in writing against the selection of the respondent No.5 on 20.02.2020 as well as 27.02.2020. A specific objection was raised by them that at the time of interview on 05.02.2020, the respondent No.5 was not having valid Non-Creamy Layer