2024:BHC-AUG:12795-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.7718 OF 2021 Dr. Devendra Narayan Bonde Age: 40 years, Occu.: Service, R/o. Nashirabad, Behind New English School, Tq. And Dist. Jalgaon. .. PETITIONER VERSUS

1. The State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary Higher and Technical Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai.

2. The Kaviyatri Bahinabai Chaudhari North Maharashtra University, Jalgaon, Through its Registrar, 3. Leva Educational Union, Jalgaon Jilha Peth, Jilha Road, Jalgaon, Through its President/Secretary, 4. Dr. Annasaheb G. D. Bendale Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Jalgaon, Jilha Road, Jilha Peth, Jalgaon, Through its Principal.

5. Dr. Rupali Deelip Chaudhari, Age: 42 years, Occu.: Service, R/o. “Pramila”, Vidya Nagar, Near Gurukul, Faizpur, Jalgaon, District Jalgaon. .. RESPONDENTS …

Mr. Anil M. Gaikwad, Advocate for the petitioner.

Dr. Kalpalata Patil Bharaswadkar, AGP for respondent No.1.

Mr. A. B. Girase, Advocate for respondent No.2.

Mr. S. R. Barlinge, Advocate for respondent Nos.3 and 4.

Mr. Ajay G. Talhar, Advocate for respondent No.5.

…

[1]

CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL AND SHAILESH P BRAHME, JJ.

RESERVED ON : 20 JUNE 2024 PRONOUNCED ON : 02 JULY 2024 JUDGMENT [Per 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 [2]

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 certificate, which was a condition precedent and hence, she was not eligible for the appointment. Considering the grievances of the petitioner and others, a Committee was constituted by the respondent No.2 University. Petitioner, respondent Management and respondent No.5 were heard.

5. The Committee gave its report on 19.01.2021 in favour of respondent No.5 and recorded that respondent No.5 was holding educational qualification and was eligible. She was recommended for granting approval. Thereafter vide letter dated 28.05.2021, respondent No.2 granted approval to the respondent No.5, albeit subject to the outcome of the Writ Petition No.12051 of 2015 preferred in the High Court.

6. Learned Counsel Mr. Anil Gaikwad for the petitioner would formulate following submissions :-

i) Respondent No.5 was not eligible as she was not having Non-Creamy Layer certificate on 05.02.2020, which was a cut off date, in view of condition stipulated in the advertisement. Her selection is overlooking to eligibility criteria.

ii) Petitioner secured 92 marks and the respondent No.5 secured 64 marks, still she was selected which is discriminatory [3]

and arbitrary.

iii) Respondent No.5 secured Non-Creamy Layer Certificate on 06.05.2021 and submitted it by tendering application on same day, which shows want of eligibility on 05.02.2020.

iv) The Non-Creamy Layer Certificate produced by respondent No.5 is backdated and cancelled subsequently.

v) Being wait-listed candidate, petitioner is entitled to be appointed at the place of respondent No.5.

vi) Reliance is placed on the judgment