1 Lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5702 OF 2009 Pandurang Laxman Ambale : Petitioner versus University of Pune & Anr. : Respondents. Mr.Abhijeet Kandarkar for the Petitioner. CORAM : S B MHASE & R M SAVANT, JJ. DATE : 21st July 2009 P.C. 1. Heard Mr.Abhijeet Kandarkar for the Petitioner. The Petitioner has approached this Court challenging the decision taken by the Respondent No.1-University to re-advertise the post of Modi Writer which the Respondent-University desires to fill in. It appears that the Petitioner had appeared in the written examination and obtained 152 marks and he claims that he was the highest in all the candidates who appeared in the said examination. However, it appears that after the interview, the Respondent-University found that none of the candidates were suitable 2 and, therefore, the Respondent-University has taken a decision to re- advertise the said post. The Petitioner has approached this Court by way of above Petition seeking writ of mandamus that the Respondent No.1 should issue an appointment order as a Modi Writer in favour of the Petitioner. 2. In the matters of employment, it is well settled principle of law that a candidate must be offered an opportunity to appear in the selection process with other candidates. Once such an opportunity is offered, the Petitioner cannot claim an appointment unless a candidate who is less meritorious than the Petitioner has been selected and appointed. Such is not the case in the present matter. The Respondent No.1-University has come to a conclusion that none of the candidates were suitable out of the candidates who were successful in written examination and those who appeared for the interview. 3. So far as opportunity, which is to be offered constitutionally, is concerned, that has been offered by the Respondent-University to the Petitioner. There is no legal right vested in the Petitioner or the other candidates who have participated in the selection process to claim appointment so that the Court can issue a mandamus to the authorities. 3 Since the selection process has been given up by the Respondent- University and the Respondent-University desires to re-advertise the said post, opportunity is available to the Petitioner to make an application and take part in the fresh selection process. The fact that in earlier selection process the Petitioner was found unsuitable, cannot be a ground in the fresh selection process to deny appointment in the fresh selection process to the Petitioner, if he is found to be meritorious and suitable for the said post in the said fresh selection. 4. For the reasons mentioned above, we refrain to entertain the above Petition. The Petition is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- sd/- [R.M.SAVANT, J] [S.B.MHASE, J]