DATTATRAYA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With consent of the parties, heard finally at admission stage.

(2.) The petitioner approaches this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, thereby assailing appointment of respondent no.6 on the post of Assistant Professor, Agricultural Economics with respondent no.4 i.e. Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Vidyapith, Parbhani. The petitioner contends that, respondent No.4 University had issued an advertisement dtd. 10/3/2015 thereby inviting applications from the eligible candidates for recruitment of various posts including the post of Assistant Professor, Agricultural Economics. In response to said advertisement, in all five candidates, including petitioner and respondent no.6 had submitted their candidature. However, petitioner and respondent no.6 were actually present for interview before the Selection Committee. Finally, Respondent no.6 has been declared as selected candidate and appointment order came to be issued in her favour.

(3.) Petitioner obtained the information under the Right to Information Act relating to selection process. On perusal of the documents, he noticed that he secured 77.90 marks and respondent no.6 secured 79.80 marks as per assessment of candidates by Selection Board Members. According to the petitioner, respondent no.6 was favoured by the Selection Committee. Further, award of marks to respondent No.6 on count of experience is based on manipulated documents. The experience certificates relied upon by respondent no.6 were either not issued by the concerned authorities or those were based on the manipulated record. According to the petitioner, if marks given to respondent no 6 against manipulated experience certificates are deducted, the petitioner would emerge more meritorious and suitable for appointment against the post of 'Assistant Professor.' The petitioner made various complaints to authorities including office of Prime Minister of India and Governor of Maharashtra. Those complaints were forwarded to the Chief Secretary, Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai for requisite action. In pursuance of the said communication, Inquiry Committee was appointed and report of such inquiry was submitted to respondent no.1. However, details of such inquiry report were not made known to the petitioner. Accordingly, petitioner prays to quash and set aside the appointment order issued in favour of respondent no.6 and appoint the him on the post of Assistant Professor, Agriculture Economics being meritorious and suitable candidate.