Shri Milind S/O Tukaram Wasink v. The Maharashtra Public Service Commission, Mumbai Thorugh Its Secretary

1 wp5959.17.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.5959 OF 2017 [Shri Milind s/o Tukaram Wasnik .vs. The Maharashtra Public Service Commission, Mumbai] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - None for the petitioner, Mrs. K.S. Joshi, AGP for the respondents.

..........

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND MRS. SWAPNA JOS HI, JJ .

DATED : APRIL 16, 2018.

By this writ petition the petitioner challenges the advertisement issued by the Maharashtra Public Service Commission, Mumbai bearing no.51/2016 inviting applications from the candidates desirous of seeking appointment on the post of Assistant Professor in Community Dentistry. According to the petitioner, the respondent - MPSC had issued an advertisement bearing nos.325/2012 and 326/2016 and the candidates were called for the interview in the process initiated in pursuance of the said advertisement. According to the petitioner, though he was placed at Sr.No.11 in the list of candidates that were entitled to be called for the interview, the petitioner was not called for the interview and instead a fresh advertisement bearing no.51/2016 was issued for filling up the same posts as they were sought to be filled by the advertisement No.326/2016.

It is most likely that the cause for filing the writ petition is rendered infructuous due to passage of time. The advertisement sought to be challenged by the petitioner is dated 27.10.2016 and the writ petition is filed on 3.5.2017. The writ petition was never circulated for admission and hearing during the past one year. The MPSC must have made some progress in the process

2 wp5959.17.odt initiated in pursuance of the advertisement dated 27.10.2016 for appointment to the posts. The petitioner must not be interested in challenging the impugned advertisement and that could be the reason for the non appearance on behalf of the petitioner in the court today.

In the circumstances of the case, we dispose of the writ petition with no order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE Gulande