1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5309 OF 2008 Ganesh s/o. Ramchandra Charchare .. petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra and others. .. Respondent. --- Ms. Maya R. Jamdhade, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.V. Kurundkar, Additional Govt. Pleader for the respondent No.1 Mr. B.A. Shinde, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 and 4. CORAM : A.P. DESHPANDE & N.D. DESHPANDE,JJ. DATE : 18th FEBRUARY, 2010. ORAL ORDER :- 1] As the Zilla Parishad, Parbhani, wanted to fill in few posts of Health Workers, an advertisement came to be 2 issued, laying down the eligibility for the post of Health Worker (Male). The qualification prescribed is SSC with 90 days of experience as a Field Worker, certified by the malaria Officer, having worked under the National Malaria Prevention Programme. 2] The petitioner, so also, the respondent No.5 being desirous of being appointed as Health Worker (male) had applied for the post. The process of selection was by holding a written test, so also, viva voce. . A merit list/select list came to be published by the District Collector and President of the District Selection Committee, Parbhani on 2/7/2008, wherein, the petitioner stands at Sr.No.3, whereas, the present respondent No.5, is at Sr. No. 8. After publication of the merit list/final select list, the petitioner came to be served with a communication dated 31/7/2008, wherein, it is stated that the petitioner had not worked as a seasonal field worker and as he is certified to have worked as a Technician in a Laboratory, hence, the 3 petitioner was found to be not eligible for being appointed and the petitioner was informed that in view of his ineligibility no appointment order can be issued to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the communication dated 31/8/2008, this petition has been filed, seeking a direction against the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to issue an appointment order to the petitioner. 3] After publication of the merit/select list, it appears that certain complaints were received and hence, an enquiry was directed with a view to scrutinize the experience certificate issued by the District Malaria Officer. A report was called from the District Malaria Officer, Parbhani. The District Malaria Officer, Parbhani, informed the District Health Officer that though the petitioner has worked for 90 days, he has not worked as a Field Worker, and he has worked as a Technician in a Laboratory. Relying on the report of the District Malaria Officer, Parbhani, the petitioner has been informed that the petitioner is not eligible for being considered for appointment to the post of Health Worker. 4 4] The petitioner has also placed on record a certificate issued by the District Malaria Officer, Hingoli, dated 1/7/2006, which certificate shows that the petitioner has worked for 99 days as a Superior Field Worker. It is undisputed that in the establishment of the Zilla Parishad, Health Department, under the Urban Malaria Scheme, there are 2 cadres in existence one is of a Field worker, and the other is of Superior Field worker. The work, responsibilities and duties of both the posts are different and the same are laid down under the Operational Manual of the Malaria Action Programme of 1995. A copy of the relevant rules, i.e. Rule No. 7.8.1 and 7.8.2 is filed on record by the respondent Zilla Parishad to point out the difference in the nature of work performed by the Field Worker and Superior Field Worker. . Thus, according to the two certificates which are issued in favour of the petitioner, it is required to be examined, as to whether the petitioner is eligible for being appointed to the post of Health Worker. 5 5] As stated hereinabove, the certificate issued by the District Malaria Officer goes to certify that the petitioner has worked for 99 days as Superior Field Worker. If this certificate is taken to be true and correct, then the petitioner would not be eligible for the post of Health Worker, as the experience required is of Field worker and not Superior Field Worker. Whereas, if the certificate issued by the District Malaria Officer, Parbhani is relied upon, then the said certificate goes to certify that the petitioner has worked for 99 days as a Technician in the Laborarory, having experience of testing the blood samples etc. This experience, yet again, does not confer eligibility on the petitioner to compete for the post of Health Worker. . In that view of the matter, we do not see any illegality being committed by the respondents in holding that the petitioner is not eligible for being considered for the post of Health Worker. True it is, that the respondents ought to have checked and re-checked the documents well in advance 6 before publishing the final selection list. It is really strange that after the select list is published, enquiries are being conducted into the correctness or otherwise of the documents submitted by the candidates. The stage at which the respondents have caused an enquiry into the correctness of the documents of the candidates deserves condemnation and we deprecate the same. However, that does not improve the merit of the petitioner's claim. 6] We do not find any merit in the petition and as such, the petition is dismissed in-limine. Needless to mention that the interim orders, if any, stand vacated. [N.D. DESHPANDE,J.] [A.P. DESHPANDE.J.] Grt/-