SAHEBRAO HARIDAS PATIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER entered the Government service in Industries Department as Industries Inspector in the year 1981. While in service, he applied for being directly recruited as Industries Officer (Technical) through Maharashtra Public Service Commissioner (in short MPSC) who came to be selected and appointed as such. Within a period of probation of two years, he was supposed to pass a qualifying examination for which he did appear in April 1992 as also in April 1993 without any success.

(2.) HE, therefore, applied for additional chance and was granted permission to appear in the examination held in 1994 and one more chance was given to him in October 1995 when the examination was held in the said month with the same result. Making out a case for one more chance, he approached the authorities by way of representation -cum-application dated 4-4-1996, Annexure-V, page 31. This was never replied to. In fact, the grievance of the petitioner is that his form for examination was never forwarded. The petitioner, therefore, approached the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal seeking the relief of additional chance. The tribunal by its order dated 16-6-1997 rejected the Original Application as per page 42, Ann-VII. Apparently, it was a one sided matter because initially petitioner was not present and the presenting officer pointed out to the tribunal that 4 chances to appear in the examination as per the rules were granted. The tribunal, therefore, felt that one more chance, which is sought by the petitioner, cannot be granted.

(3.) SO far as rule for grant of chance is concerned, we have got the Government Resolution governing the case and it is produced as Annexure-III, page 22 onwards. The relevant paragraph of that Resolution is to be found at page 24 and it is paragraph 5. On reading the entire resolution, it is quite clear that, nowhere there is a rule of grant of 4 chances. The learned A. G. P. is right to state that the rule is to grant 2 chances when the examinations are held in the month of April ordinarily. As noted above, the examinations were in fact held in the month of April of the years 1992, 1993, and 1994. Only in the year 1995, it was held in the month of October. However, coming to make the said statement before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal that 4 chances as per rules having been granted, it has to be held that this submission is not supported by any rule as carved out from the said G. R. The said tribunal in different set of matters concerning to education department, had an occasion to deal with the very question, where, as per the copy of the order Ann-VII, page 39, it has been noted that instances were found where 5 chances or more than 5 chances were given. This can be seen at page 39 of the present petition.