Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ashok S/o Laxman Nikale, filed a writ petition challenging the selection process adopted by Respondent No.1, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, for filling up the posts of Store Keeper advertised vide Exhibit A to the petition. The petitioner participated in the selection process and secured 45 marks out of 70 in the written examination, standing first in the merit list. However, the selection process included an oral interview, which was not provided for in the Government Resolution dated 19th October, 2007 issued by the General Administration Department, Government of Maharashtra. The petitioner contended that the selection process was contrary to the mandate of the Hon'ble Apex Court and ignored merit criteria. The respondents argued that the selection was conducted as per rules. The court, after hearing the parties, found that the Government Resolution did not prescribe any oral interview for the post of Store Keeper, and the introduction of an oral interview vitiated the selection process. The court held that the petitioner, having secured the highest marks in the written examination, was entitled to be selected. The court quashed the selection process and directed the respondents to reconsider the selection in accordance with the Government Resolution dated 19th October, 2007, without conducting any oral interview. The petition was allowed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Selection Process - Oral Interview - Government Resolution dated 19th October, 2007 - The selection process for the post of Store Keeper was challenged on the ground that an oral interview was conducted contrary to the Government Resolution which did not provide for any interview. The petitioner had secured the highest marks in the written examination but was not selected. The court held that the selection process was vitiated as the oral interview was not authorized by the Government Resolution, and the merit list based on written examination should have been followed. (Paras 1-3) B) Service Law - Merit - Written Examination - Government Resolution dated 19th October, 2007 - The court emphasized that the Government Resolution did not prescribe any oral interview, and the selection should have been based solely on the written examination marks. The petitioner, who stood first in the written examination, was entitled to be selected. The court quashed the selection process and directed the respondents to reconsider the selection in accordance with the Government Resolution. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the selection process for the post of Store Keeper conducted by Respondent No.1 is valid when it included an oral interview not mandated by the Government Resolution dated 19th October, 2007, and whether the petitioner, who secured the highest marks in the written examination, was wrongly denied appointment.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The selection process for the post of Store Keeper conducted by Respondent No.1 is quashed. The respondents are directed to reconsider the selection in accordance with the Government Resolution dated 19th October, 2007, without conducting any oral interview.
Law Points
- Selection process must strictly adhere to prescribed rules
- Oral interview not provided in Government Resolution cannot be introduced
- Merit in written examination is paramount
- Courts can interfere if selection is arbitrary or contrary to rules
