Shaikh Riyaz Shaikh Ahmed v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 wp 4111.20

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 48 WRIT PETITION NO. 4111 OF 2020 SHAIKH RIYAZ SHAIKH AHMED

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioner :

Mr. Amol Kakade h/f. Mr. Zia Ul Mustafa AGP for Respondents/State: Mrs. V. N. Patil-Jadhav Advocate for Respondent No. 2 : Mr. P. S. Dighe ...

CORAM:S. V. GANGAPURWALA & SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

DATE: 17th MARCH, 2020 PER COURT:

1.

The petitioner is challenging the advertisement, so also, the rejection of his candidature.

2.

Mr. Kakade, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the qualification prescribed in the advertisement is not in accordance with statute. For a Storekeeper, the degree in Law would be irrelevant. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner has an additional charge of Storekeeper with the

2 wp 4111.20 respondent / institution since October-2017. The petitioner possesses the necessary qualification. 3.

The experience and qualification prescribed in the advertisement for the post of Storekeeper reads thus- "१. कला, वाणणिज्य व ववजाञ ककवा का्यदायातल पदवात मान्यया्ाा ववदपातठायनኂञ उ्ቈातणर केलेला असावा.

२. संस्थेयातल ककवा मोठ्ा उदोोायातल भांाााामध्ये कामकाजााा वकमाञ ०३ वराराा अञुभव असावा.

३. टंकलेखञााात मााठात व इंगजात ३० व ४० शबद ््यवमवञट पाातका उ्ቈातणर असावा.

४. कहदात व मााठात भारेाे जाञ नवआ्यक.

५. एम.एस.सात.न्य.टात. पाातका उ्ቈातणर असावा."

4.

It is not that, as per the advertisement, the Storekeeper should possess the degree of Law. The candidate may possess Arts, Commerce or Science or Law degree, either of the degree was sufficient. The advertisement further prescribed three years experience as a Storekeeper with any institution or industry. Even if, the contention of the petitioner is accepted that the petitioner possesses the experience of Storekeeper from

3 wp 4111.20 October-2017, the same is not sufficient. The experience certificate produced by the petitioner is only for one year.

5.

Considering the above, the petitioner did not possess the experience as per the advertisement. 6.

The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the advertisement is contrary to the statute.

7.

The petitioner possesses the qualification as prescribed in the advertisement. It is only on the count of experience, the petitioner has failed. Moreover, the petitioner has participated in the selection process. After having failed in the selection process the petitioner cannot be allowed to challenge the advertisement.

8.

Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

[SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] marathe