VRUSHALI VILAS KUCHEKAR Vs. MAHARASHTRA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned counsel for the respondents waive service. By consent of parties, the writ petition is heard finally.

(2.) The petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the second proviso to Rule 6(2)(a) of the Maharashtra Judicial Service Rules, 2008 to the extent of putting a cut of mark 40% in viva-voce examination and also prays for quashing and setting aside the advertisement more particularly condition no.8.4 by holding that it is ultra-vires the Article 14 to the Constitution of India. The petitioner has also prayed for an order and direction against the respondents to consider the name of the petitioner for recommendation for appointment of the post of Judicial Magistrate First Class and Civil Judge, Junior Division. The petitioner has prayed for an order and direction against the respondents to produce the name of panels, who had conducted the interviews and the candidates who appeared before them in pursuance to the advertisement issued by the respondent no.1.

(3.) Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this petition are as under :