Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sandesh Subhash Kadav, was placed on the waiting list at serial no.1 for the post of Extension Officer (Education), Class III, Grade II, pursuant to an advertisement and selection process conducted by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Ratnagiri. The selected candidate expressed unwillingness to join the post. The petitioner made representations on 3.12.2012, 4.2.2012, and 9.1.2013 seeking appointment. The respondents, in their affidavit dated 21.12.2013, did not deny the petitioner's right but contended that they had sought directions from the State of Maharashtra and were awaiting the same. The court rejected this submission, noting that the appointing authority could have appointed the petitioner under the advertisement itself, as the representation was made within one year of the advertisement/selection. The court also referred to a similar decision in Udaysing Jalamsing Valvi v. The Secretary, District Selection Committee, Raigad Z.P., Alibagh (Writ Petition No.4257 of 2013). The court held that the respondents were not justified in delaying the appointment and directed them to appoint the petitioner within four weeks from the date of the order. The writ petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Appointment from Waiting List - Right of Waiting List Candidate - Petitioner was on waiting list at serial no.1 for the post of Extension Officer (Education) - Selected candidate expressed unwillingness to join - Petitioner made representations within one year of advertisement - Respondent authority failed to appoint despite permissible regulations and Government Resolution - Held that the appointing authority cannot await state directions and must appoint the waiting list candidate (Paras 2-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a candidate on the waiting list at serial no.1 is entitled to be appointed when the selected candidate has expressed unwillingness to join, and whether the appointing authority can delay appointment pending directions from the State Government.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Extension Officer (Education) within four weeks from the date of the order. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Waiting list candidate has right to appointment when selected candidate declines
- Appointing authority cannot await state directions indefinitely
- Appointment from waiting list permissible within one year of advertisement
Case Details
2014 LawText (BOM) (09) 118
Writ Petition No. 5278 of 2013
Anoop V. Mohta, F. M. Reis
Mr. Sagar Mane I/by Mr. N.V. Bandiwadekar for the petitioner. None for the respondents.
Shri Sandesh Subhash Kadav
The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Ratnagiri cum Member of the District
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition seeking direction to appoint petitioner from waiting list for the post of Extension Officer (Education).
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought appointment to the post of Extension Officer (Education) as he was on waiting list at serial no.1 and the selected candidate had expressed unwillingness.
Filing Reason
Respondent authority failed to appoint the petitioner despite his representations and the selected candidate's unwillingness.
Issues
Whether the petitioner, being on waiting list at serial no.1, is entitled to appointment when the selected candidate has expressed unwillingness?
Whether the respondent authority can delay appointment pending directions from the State Government?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner submitted that he was on waiting list at serial no.1 and the selected candidate had expressed unwillingness, and he made representations within one year of advertisement.
Respondents contended that they had sought direction from the State of Maharashtra and the same is awaited.
Ratio Decidendi
A candidate on the waiting list at serial no.1 is entitled to be appointed when the selected candidate expresses unwillingness, and the appointing authority cannot delay appointment by awaiting state directions, especially when the representation is made within one year of the advertisement.
Judgment Excerpts
The Petitioner is admittedly on waiting list at serial no.1 for the post of Extension Officer (Education), ClassIII, GradeII, after due advertisement and procedure followed by Respondent NO.1Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Ratnagiri.
The Respondents in their affidavit dated 21.12.2013 not even denied the rights of the Petitioner to be appointed on the post and so also above facts, however, contended that they have sought direction from the State of Maharashtra and the same is awaited.
We are not inclined to accept this submission basically at the instance of Respondent No.1, who is the appointing authority and even otherwise, pursuant to their advertisement itself they could have appointed the Petitioner as the representation was made within one year from the date of advertisement/selection of candidates, who had in writing expressed unwillingness to join the post.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 5278 of 2013 before the Bombay High Court. The respondents filed an affidavit dated 21.12.2013. The court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 05.09.2014.
