BHARATI TUKARAM PATIL Vs. ZILLHA PARISHAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal is preferred by the original plaintiff to challenge the concurrent judgments and decrees dismissing her suit. The plaintiff had prayed for a declaration that she be held eligible for the post of 'Supervisor' pursuant to the advertisement dtd. 5/3/2010 ('Advertisement') published by defendant nos. 1 and 2. The plaintiff prayed for directing defendants nos. 1 and 2 to appoint her to the post of 'Supervisor' pursuant to the selection process held as per the Advertisement. The plaintiff further prayed for a restraining order against defendant nos. 1 and 3 from appointing defendant no. 4 to the post of 'Supevisor'. Defendant no. 4 is the candidate selected by defendant nos. 1 and 2 in the selection process pursuant to the advertisement. During the pendency of the suit, defendant no. 4 was appointed to the post of 'Supervisor (Woman)"; hence, by way of amendment, the plaintiff challenged the order dtd. 21/7/2011, appointing defendant no. 4.

(2.) Defendant nos. 1 and 2 is Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur, through the Chief Executive Officer. Defendant no. 3 is the State of Maharashtra, and defendant no. 4 is the candidate selected and appointed by defendant nos. 1 and 2 to the post of Supervisor in the selection process conducted pursuant to the advertisement.

(3.) The second appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law vide order dtd. 13/12/2016: