ASN 1 WP-3675.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3675 OF 2010 Vijaykumar R. Keshgond. ..Petitioner. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and ors. ..Respondents. Mr.S.G.Deshmukh i/by A.J.Kandarkar for the Petitioner. Mr. Nitin Jamdar for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr.Surel S.Shah for Respondent No.4. Mr.A.I.Patel, AGP. For Respondent-State. CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C. J. AND D. G. KARNIK, J. Monday, 26 th April, 2011 PC: The petitioner had applied in response to the advertisement dated 3rd February, 2008 inviting applications for the post of Shikshan Sevak under the scheme of Shikshan Sevak of the State Government. The post was reserved for physically handicapped candidate. The applications were to be submitted by 17th February, 2008. By subsequent corrigendum number of posts of Shikshan Sevak were increased from 17 to 22 and finally upto 28 but the reservation for physically handicapped persons was restricted to one post only. In November, 2008 select list was published by respondent No.1 and following persons were shown in the select list of physically handicapped persons. ASN 2 WP-3675.sxw 1. Manure Prabhu Kallppa. - Selected. 2. Swami Siddharam Racchayya No.1 in the Waiting list. 3. Keshgond Vijayakumar No.2 in the waiting list. Revanappa Petitioner. The said list was prepared in December, 2008 and its validity period was upto 31st December, 2009. 2 When it was found that Manure Prabhu Kallppa who was shown as a selected candidate No.1 had wrongfully obtained his certificate of disability, his name was deleted on 2nd December, 2009. On 4th Feb. 2010, the respondent No.1 again issued advertisement inviting applications for one post of Shikshan Sevak reserved for physically handicapped candidate. The petitioner therefore, requested respondent No.1 to appoint him as Shikshan Sevak as Manure Prabhu Kallppa had obtained his certificate of disability beyond the prescribed period and the first candidate on the waiting list viz. Swami Siddharam Racchayya had submitted his certificate of disability on 15th September, 2008 as against the last date of 31st August, 2008. The petitioner was however, replied by the State Govt. on 27th May, 2010 that the validity of the select list was upto 31st December, 2009 and thereafter fresh advertisement was also issued on 4th February, 2010 and hence, petitioner’s request cannot be accepted. The petitioner has therefore, moved this Court. 3 By order dated 4th February, 2011 Siddharam Racchayya Swami was permitted to be joined as respondent No.4. In the mean ASN 3 WP-3675.sxw time, no stay was granted against the recruitment process in pursuance of the advertisement dated 4th February, 2010. The parties are not in a position to state whether the post has since been filled up under the advertisement dated 4th February, 2010 . At the time of hearing today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the selected candidate No.1 Manure Prabhu Kappppa was found to have obtained certificate of disability wrongfully and therefore, his name was deleted on 2nd December, 2009 and since the second candidate being first in the waiting list had submitted his certificate of disability 15 days beyond the last stipulated date, the petitioner being at Sr. No.2 in the waiting list was the only eligible candidate for the post reserved for physically handicapped persons. It is submitted that the petitioner had also made a complaint against the certificate of Manure Prabhu Kallappa and merely because the authorities took long time to take final decision in deleting the name of Manure Prabhu Kallppa from the select list, the petitioner cannot be made to suffer. It is submitted that respondent No.1 be directed to appoint the petitioner as physically handicapped and only eligible candidate for the post of Shikshan Sevak in pursuance of the selection process which had commenced as per advertisement dated 3rd February, 2008. The learned counsel for the respondent-authorities as well as learned counsel for respondent No.4 has opposed the petition. It is submitted on behalf of respondent No.4 that respondent No.4 is ready to participate in the selection process started over again on 4th February, 2010 and the petitioner should not be given appointment when the validity date of the waiting list has already expired on 31st December, 2009. ASN 4 WP-3675.sxw 4 Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that as the name of the petitioner was shown in the waiting list, he has no right to claim appointment. The list was valid upto 31st December, 2009 . The contention that delay by the authorities in taking the action against the selected candidate Manure Prabhu Kallppa cannot be held out against the petitioner, cannot be accepted. When the first advertisement was advertised on 3rd February, 2008 only one post was to be filled from the select list of physically handicapped persons. The waiting list consisting of two persons was prepared and if the selected candidate was not to join, the person in the waiting list could be appointed. The object of preparing the waiting list is to ensure that if the selected candidate does not join, the authorities are not required to recommence the selection process again and therefore, the waiting list does not confer any indefeasible right on the candidate. This position is too well settled and if any authority is needed, one is readily to be found in State of Orissa and another Vs. Rajkishore Nanda and others in (2010) 6 S.C.C. 777. In view of the above stated legal position and in view of the fact that fresh advertisement was issued on 4th February, 2010 after deletion of the name of the Namure Prabhu Kallppa from the select list on 2nd December, 2009, and that the fresh selection process had already commenced even before the present petition was filed, we see no reason to interfere with the said selection process. The petition is accordingly, dismissed and stands disposed of. ASN 5 WP-3675.sxw 5 In view of the fact that advertisement had been issued on 4th February, 2010 by respondent-authorities, if the selection process has not been concluded by now, the respondent authorities shall complete the process as expeditiously as possible and preferably within three months from today. CHIEF JUSTICE D.G. KARNIK, J.