Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Miss. Dilsha Datta Mashelkar, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court at Goa seeking a mandamus directing the Mapusa Municipal Council (respondent no.2) to issue an order of appointment to the post of Lower Division Clerk. The Mapusa Municipal Council had advertised the post on 28.1.2016, requiring, inter alia, two years' experience in the relevant field. The petitioner, belonging to the Other Backward Class category, applied and was called for a skill test and oral interview. However, her candidature was rejected on the ground that she did not possess the requisite two years' experience. The petitioner contended that she had submitted an experience certificate from her previous employer, M/s. V. M. Salgaocar & Brother Pvt. Ltd., showing she had worked as a Clerk from 1.6.2012 to 31.5.2014, which satisfied the experience requirement. The respondent council argued that the certificate was not sufficient and that the petitioner lacked the necessary experience. The court examined the advertisement and found that it did not specify any particular mode of proving experience, such as a certificate from a government authority or a specific format. The court held that the rejection was arbitrary and unreasonable, as the certificate provided by the petitioner was a valid document from a private employer. The court noted that the council had not disputed the authenticity of the certificate. Consequently, the court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondent no.2 to issue an order of appointment in favour of the petitioner, subject to her fulfilling other requirements such as medical tests. The court emphasized that administrative decisions must be based on objective criteria and not on subjective or arbitrary grounds.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Appointment - Eligibility Criteria - Experience Requirement - The court considered whether the Mapusa Municipal Council was justified in rejecting the petitioner's application for the post of Lower Division Clerk on the ground that she did not possess the requisite two years' experience, despite her having submitted an experience certificate from a former employer. The court held that the rejection was arbitrary as the advertisement did not prescribe any specific mode of proving experience, and the certificate was sufficient prima facie evidence. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the rejection of the petitioner's candidature for the post of Lower Division Clerk on the ground of lack of experience was justified when the petitioner possessed a certificate of experience and the advertisement did not specify the mode of proof of experience.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition and directed respondent no.2 to issue an order of appointment in favour of the petitioner to the post of Lower Division Clerk, subject to the petitioner fulfilling medical test or other such requirements.
Law Points
- Writ of mandamus
- Appointment
- Eligibility criteria
- Experience requirement
- Rejection of candidature
- Judicial review of administrative action
