HASTREKHA MOHANLAL BORKAR Vs. ZILLA PARISHAD GONDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE returnable forthwith. Heard finally with consent of learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner has sought a direction to the respondent Authorities to issue an appointment order in her favour as a candidate from open category (woman) in pursuance of her selection for the post of Extension Officer (Agriculture).

(3.) FROM the above list, it is an admitted position that the candidates at serial Nos. 2 to 5 were selected and interviewed sometime in July, 2008. Amongst them, the petitioner, who is at serial No. 2, had been found to be the highest and entitled for selection and was also given a letter that she was selected, as noticed earlier. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the entire selection procedure is vitiated by arbitrariness in that though the petitioner was selected having been found to be more meritorious and also issued a letter to that effect, the name of respondent No. 5, which did not appear in the entire selection process at any stage was arbitrarily brought in by the Zilla Parishad and forwarded to the District Selection Board for interview. Further that the respondent No. 5 was the sole candidate, who was introduced in the selection process and interview after about one year and five months of the conclusion of the selection process earlier.