Kiran Narayan Patil v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

2025:BHC-AUG:14906-DB 953-WP-13668-17.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 13668 OF 2017 KIRAN NARAYAN PATIL

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Mr. Amol B. Chalak, Advocate along with Mr. Ramkisan K. Wagh, Advocate for the Petitioner;

Mr. V. M. Kagne, AGP for Respondent No.1:

Mr. Anil M. Gaikwad, Advocate for Respondent ...

CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE AND SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, JJ.

DATE : 12-06-2025 PER COURT:- 1.

Heard.

2.

The prayer is for quashing and setting aside communication dated 24.08.2017 issued by respondent No.4 whereby the candidature of the petitioner as Junior Lab Chemist has been disqualified for not holding the appropriate qualification. 3.

The fact remains that the petitioner possesses qualification of M.Sc. (Biotechnology), whereas, the requisite qualification is B.Sc. (Chemistry).

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn support from the certificate issued by the Deputy Registrar of North Maharashtra University, Jalgaon certifying that the petitioner can be said to be qualified, as almost 55% to 60 % both the courses are similar.

953-WP-13668-17.odt 5.

In addition to above, the petitioner has sought support from Government Resolution dated 23.05.2014 thereby claiming that the petitioner since holds the qualification in M.Sc. (Biotechnology) same can be said to be equivalent.

6.

As far as reliance placed by the Deputy Registrar, North Maharashtra University, Jalgaon, dated 21.07.2017 is concerned, we fail to understand under which statutory authority, the Deputy Registrar has determined the equivalent qualification. We are unable to convince ourselves based on the said communication that there is statutory support to the certification issued by the Deputy Registrar, Board of Studies.

7.

Apart from the above, in our opinion, the reliance placed by the petitioner on the Government Resolution dated 23.05.2014 is fully displaced as there is no violation of the terms of the Government Resolution as has been claimed by the petitioner. Apart from the above, the decision of the respondent to proceed with the recruitment in absence of interim relief by this Court, cannot be interfered with as same in accordance with Rules is taken to its logical conclusion by the respondent/Management. 8.

For the above, we see that there is no reason for interference in the extraordinary writ jurisdiction. The petition stands dismissed. No costs.

[SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.] [NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.] rrd