Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Deepak Marotirao Narwad, was employed as a Junior Security Officer with the Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited (MAHAGENCO) since 27-11-2012. In 2017, the respondents advertised for nine posts of Deputy Manager (Security), with one post reserved for the V.J. (A) category. The petitioner applied under that category and participated in the selection process, including an online examination and interview. On 19-07-2017, a provisional list was published showing Nagnath Hanumanth Pachave as the selected candidate from the V.J. (A) category, with Mithun Prem Rathod at serial no. 1 and the petitioner at serial no. 2 in the wait list. During document verification on 03-08-2017, it was discovered that both Pachave and Rathod did not meet the eligibility criteria. The petitioner, being the next in the wait list, expected to be appointed. However, the respondents did not appoint him and instead abandoned the selection process for that post. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents to consider his candidature and appoint him. The respondents argued that the selection process was for nine posts and that the wait list was only provisional, and they had the discretion to not fill the post. The court, after considering the submissions, held that once the candidates above the petitioner in the provisional list were found ineligible, the petitioner, being the next in the wait list, acquired a right to be considered. The court found the respondents' action of not filling the post to be arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The court allowed the petition, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner for appointment to the post of Deputy Manager (Security) from the V.J. (A) category within four weeks.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Selection Process - Right to Appointment - Provisional List and Wait List - When candidates in the provisional list are found ineligible, the next candidate in the wait list acquires a right to be considered for appointment, and the employer cannot abandon the selection process for that post. The court held that the respondents were not justified in not filling the post from the wait list and directed them to consider the petitioner for appointment. (Paras 2-10) B) Constitutional Law - Articles 14 and 16 - Equal Opportunity in Public Employment - The selection process must be fair and non-arbitrary; once a candidate is found eligible and placed in the wait list, he has a legitimate expectation to be considered if the selected candidates are found ineligible. (Paras 8-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, who was at serial no. 2 in the wait list for the V.J. (A) category for the post of Deputy Manager (Security), is entitled to be appointed when the candidates above him in the provisional list were found ineligible, and whether the respondents could abandon the selection process for that post.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to consider the petitioner for appointment to the post of Deputy Manager (Security) from the V.J. (A) category within four weeks.
Law Points
- Right to be considered for appointment
- Selection process
- Provisional list
- Wait list
- Eligibility criteria
- Abandonment of selection process
- Article 14
- Article 16
- Article 226
