Writ Petition No. 9395 of 2015. Case: Vivek Balkrishna Mahajan Vs The State of Maharashtra and Ors.. High Court of Bombay (India)
| Case Number | Writ Petition No. 9395 of 2015 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: S.S. Jadhavar, Advocate and For Respondents: S.B. Yawalkar, AGP |
| Judges | S. S. Shinde and V. K. Jadhav, JJ. |
| Issue | Service Law |
| Judgement Date | May 05, 2016 |
| Court | High Court of Bombay (India) |
Judgment:
S. S. Shinde, J.
-
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, and heard finally with the consent of the parties.
-
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.
-
It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to claim benefit of reservation of sportsmen category. MPSC had issued an advertisement for the posts of clerk-cum-typist, providing reservation of sportsmen category to some of the posts. The petitioner, being eligible for reservation of sportsmen, submitted an application claiming reservation of sportsmen category, in response to the said advertisement.
-
It is further the case of the petitioner that after following due process of selection, the petitioner was selected as against a post reserved for sportsmen category. In view of the selection of the petitioner as against a post reserved for sportsmen category, his claim of sportsmen category was referred by respondent No. 3 to the office of respondent No. 2 for verification. It is the case of the petitioner that without verifying relevant aspects of the matter, respondent No. 2 was pleased to reject claim of the petitioner as against sportsmen category, and the claims of other similarly situated candidates have been validated by respondent No. 2. In the light of rejection of the claim of the petitioner as against sportsmen category, respondent No. 3 was pleased to cancel selection of the petitioner by the impugned order.
-
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the office of respondent No. 2 has verified and approved the claim of other similarly situated candidates for entitlement for additional marks/weightage of the reservation of sportsmen category. It is submitted that the petitioner was selected for the post of clerk/typist in view of the advertisement dated 20th February, 2013, and his name was recommended along with other selected candidates to the State Government. In view of the recommendation made by the MPSC, respondent No. 1 has issued a Government Resolution dated 7th April, 2014, declaring list of the candidates, who have been selected for the post of Clerk/Typist in the office of the State Government, proposing issuance of appointment order in their favour in view of their selection made by the MPSC. The petitioner's name was at serial No. 139 in the select list published along with the Government Resolution dated 7th April, 2014. The petitioner was selected against a seat reserved for sportsmen category. Therefore, his claim was forwarded by respondent No. 3 to the office of respondent No. 2 for verification by covering letter dated 22nd April, 2014. It is submitted that the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal [in short 'MAT'] has not properly considered the contentions of the petitioner that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial