CHARUMATI S. KHANDARE Vs. NATIONAL SCHOOL OF DRAMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging two selection processes. First selection process was pursuant to the advertisement dated 1.7.2012 for appointment of three artists. The second selection process is in terms of the advertisement dated 13.4.2013 for one artist and which process is still not complete. Appointments as per the first advertisement of three artists, and for one artist as per the second advertisement has to take place in the Theatre in Education Company (T.I.E Company), a unit of respondent no.1-National School of Drama.

(2.) SO far as the challenge laid by the petitioner to the recruitment process initiated in terms of the advertisement dated 1.7.2012, and which stands concluded in terms of the Selection Committee Meeting held on 25/26/27.7.2012, the writ petition, in my opinion is liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. The writ petition has been filed on 18.7.2013 i.e well after the conclusion of the Selection Committee Meeting in July, 2012, and for which, appointments of three artists have already been made in August, 2012 even as per the statement of the petitioner made before me. In April, 2013 after vested rights have accrued in favour of the three selected persons, and who were selected out of 40 persons, these rights cannot be disturbed at this late stage by setting aside their appointments.

(3.) THE first contention of the petitioner is that selection of the first two persons (out of the three selected) namely Mr. Kanhaya Lal Rathore and Ms. Sheel as artists in T.I.E Company is bad because these persons did not have the requisite experience as stated in the advertisement dated 1.7.2012. In order to examine this argument, let us see what was the requirement in advertisement and what are the qualifications of Mr. Kanhaya Lal Rathore and Ms. Sheel. Following are the essential qualifications which were required in terms of the advertisement.