Varsha Vishram Thakur v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary Rural Development And Water Conserv. And ORS

1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION KANCHAN VINOD MAYEKAR KANCHAN VINOD MAYEKAR Date: 2022.04.26 18:20:39 +0530 WRIT PETITION NO. 10199 OF 2018 Varsha Vishram Thakur ..... Petitioner

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

..... Respondents Mr.V.S.Tadke for the Petitioner.

Ms.P.N.Diwan, A.G.P. for the State - Respondent nos. 1, 2 and 4. Mr.Ramesh D.Rane for the Respondent no.3.

CORAM : A.S.CHANDURKAR & G.A.SANAP, JJ.

DATE : 25TH APRIL, 2022.

P.C:- Heard.

2.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the communication dated 26th July, 2017 issued by the 3rd respondent informing the petitioner that her candidature for appointment on the post of Shikshan Sevak could not be considered since the life of the select list was for a period of one year which had already come to an end.

3.

Pursuant to an advertisement issued in the yer 2010 by the Zilla

2/3 Parishad Sindhudurg, the petitioner applied for being considered for appointment on the post of Shikshan Sevak after passing the qualifying examination. She appeared for the interview on 17th March, 2011. The petitioner was duly selected but during the verification of the documents, it was found that she was not having a validity certificate nor any acknowledgment to indicate that her caste claim was pending before the Scrutiny Committee. The petitioner was therefore not given any order of appointment. Subsequently the Zilla Parishad considered the case of the two other employees for appointment. The petitioner on 17th April, 2017 made an application seeking her appointment on the post in question. The petitioner was informed that the life of the select list was for only one year which period had expired. Being aggrieved, the writ petition has been filed.

4.

It is the fact that the recruitment process in which the petitioner had participated took in the year 2010-11 and therefore the Zilla Parishad was justified in informing the petitioner by the impugned communication that the life of the select list had expired. 5.

It is seen that the petitioner had now been issued validity

3/3 certificate in the year 2019. In these facts, it can only be observed that if any fresh advertisement is issued by the Zilla Parishad for recruiting Shikshan Sevaks, it would be open for the petitioner to seek appointment in accordance with law. The impugned communication would not come in her way in the fresh process of recruitment. 6.

With these observations, writ petition is disposed of with no order as to costs.

[G.A.SANAP, J.] [A.S.CHANDURKAR, J.]