Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Pradeep Dnyaneshwar Lekarwale and Rajaram Jagannath Mane, were working as Assistant Professors on a temporary basis in colleges run by respondent No. 6, Matsyodari Shikshan Sanstha, Jalna, a permanently affiliated educational institution receiving grants from the University Grants Commission. On 01.02.2023, respondent No. 6 issued an advertisement inviting applications for the post of Assistant Professor. The petitioners challenged this advertisement and the subsequent selection process under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking quashing of the advertisement, setting aside of the entire selection process, and directions to re-advertise the posts afresh with reservation for women, persons with disabilities, and the Socially and Economically Backward Class (SEBC) category (Maratha community). The court examined the issue of whether the advertisement and selection process were valid without incorporating the mandatory reservations. The court noted that the respondent institution, being a grant-in-aid institution, is bound to follow the reservation policy as per the Maharashtra State Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes, Nomadic Tribes, Special Backward Category, Other Backward Classes, Socially and Economically Backward Class) Act, 2018. The advertisement did not specify any reservation for women, persons with disabilities, or SEBC category, which was a clear violation of statutory provisions. The court held that the selection process was illegal and liable to be set aside. Consequently, the court quashed the advertisement dated 01.02.2023 and set aside the entire selection process. The court directed respondent No. 6 to re-advertise the posts afresh, incorporating reservation for women, persons with disabilities, and SEBC category, along with specification of vacant posts earmarked for such categories. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Reservation - Non-compliance with statutory reservation - Advertisement dated 01.02.2023 for Assistant Professor posts failed to provide reservation for women, persons with disabilities, and SEBC category - Held that the selection process is illegal and liable to be set aside - Court directed respondent No. 6 to re-advertise the posts afresh with proper reservation (Paras 1-9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the advertisement and selection process for the post of Assistant Professor by respondent No. 6 is valid without providing reservation for women, persons with disabilities, and SEBC category as mandated by law.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The advertisement dated 01.02.2023 is quashed and set aside. The entire selection process undertaken pursuant to the said advertisement is set aside. Respondent No. 6 is directed to re-advertise the posts afresh by incorporating reservation for women, persons with disabilities, and SEBC category along with specification of vacant posts earmarked for such categories. Rule is made absolute. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Reservation policy must be strictly followed in public employment
- Non-compliance with statutory reservation provisions renders selection process illegal
- Writ petition maintainable under Article 226 for violation of fundamental rights
Case Details
Writ Petition No. 13384 of 2025
Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, Hiten S. Venegavkar
Mr. Y. H. Jadhav for petitioners, Mr. S. B. Dhaware, AGP for respondent-State
Pradeep S/o Dnyaneshwar Lekarwale and Rajaram S/o Jagannath Mane
State of Maharashtra, The Director of Higher Education, The Vice-Chancellor, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, The Joint-Director of Education, The Selection Committee, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, Matsyodari Shikshan Sanstha, Jalna, The Administrative Officer, Matsyodari Shikshan Sanstha, Jalna
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an advertisement and selection process for the post of Assistant Professor.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of advertisement dated 01.02.2023, setting aside of entire selection process, and direction to re-advertise with reservation for women, persons with disabilities, and SEBC category.
Filing Reason
The advertisement and selection process did not provide reservation for women, persons with disabilities, and SEBC category as mandated by law.
Issues
Whether the advertisement dated 01.02.2023 for Assistant Professor posts is valid without providing reservation for women, persons with disabilities, and SEBC category?
Whether the selection process undertaken pursuant to the said advertisement is liable to be set aside?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners submitted that respondent No. 6 is a permanently affiliated educational institution receiving grants from UGC and is bound to follow reservation policy. The advertisement did not specify reservation for women, persons with disabilities, and SEBC category, which is illegal.
Respondents argued that the petition is not maintainable or that the reservation was not required (inferred from context).
Ratio Decidendi
A grant-in-aid educational institution is bound to follow the statutory reservation policy under the Maharashtra State Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes, Nomadic Tribes, Special Backward Category, Other Backward Classes, Socially and Economically Backward Class) Act, 2018. Failure to provide reservation for women, persons with disabilities, and SEBC category in the advertisement and selection process renders the entire process illegal and liable to be set aside.
Judgment Excerpts
The present petition has been filed under article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing and setting aside of the advertisement dated 01.02.2023 issued by respondent No. 6 inviting applications for the post of 'Assistant Professor' in the colleges run by it.
The petitioners are working with respondent No. 6 as 'Assistant Professor' in different faculties on temporary basis for several years.
The advertisement did not specify any reservation for women, persons with disabilities, or SEBC category, which was a clear violation of statutory provisions.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 13384 of 2025 before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, challenging the advertisement dated 01.02.2023 and the selection process. The court issued rule and heard the matter finally with consent of parties. Judgment was delivered on 25.11.2025.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226, Article 227
- Maharashtra State Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes, Nomadic Tribes, Special Backward Category, Other Backward Classes, Socially and Economically Backward Class) Act, 2018:
