Sachin Gangadhar Magar v. City And Industrial Development Corporation Of Maharashtra Ltd Through Its Manager Navi Mumbai

{1} 948 sr. no 9610,9611

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9610 OF 2016 WITH WP/9611/2016 SACHIN GANGADHAR MAGAR

VERSUS

CITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF MAHARASHTRA LTD THROUGH ITS MANAGE ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Sandesh R. Patil AGP for Respondents: Mr. A.S. Bajaj.

. . .

CORAM : R.M. BORDE & K.K. SONAWANE, JJ.

DATE : 18TH OCTOBER, 2016.

PER COURT:

1] The petitioners are praying for issuance of directions to the respondent to hold them qualified for competing for the posts of Development Officer and Assistant Development Officer in the respondent establishment. Petitioners have tendered application seeking employment in pursuance to the advertisement issued by CiDCO. Petitioners have been disqualified and have not been called for interview on the ground that they do not possess the requisite educational qualification and experience. 2] The educational qualification prescribed in the advertisement lays down that a candidate seeking employment shall possess a Degree of recognized University and Specialization in the area in which the candidate will have to work i.e. So far as Development Officer is concerned, the requirement is a Degree of a recognized University Plus Specialization in the area in which the candidate will have work, with a further rider that the candidate should possess a degree from a recognized University and Postgraduate degree in HR/Marketing/Administration. It is contended that the

{2} 948 sr. no 9610,9611 petitioners do not possess a management degree in HR/Marketing/Administration, whereas, they hold a Post-graduate degree in Applied Management.

3] Apart from this, it is contended by the counsel for the respondent that the petitioners do not have the requisite service experience in supervisory or administrative capacity in a Government, Semi Government office or reputed public/private sector organization. Petitioners possess experience with private firms which cannot be equated with Private Sector Organization.

4] Since the petitioners do not fulfill the experience criteria specified in the advertisement, without going into merits of the contentions in respect of fulfillment of educational criteria, we do not deem it appropriate cause interference in the matter in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Petitions are devoid of substance, hence, the same stand dismissed.

[K.K.SONAWANE] [R.M. BORDE] JUDGE JUDGE grt/-