1 W.P. 1217/1994 & 1223/1994 ( J ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 1217 OF 1994 Balaji S/o Ramrao Dumane Age : 34 Yrs., Occ. Service, R/o : At, Post : Ter, Tq. & Dist. Osmanabad. .... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. State of Maharashtra Through the Govt. Pleader High Court of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad. 2. The Maharashtra State Electricity Board, Estrella Batteries Expn. Building Ground Floor, Plot No. 1 Dhavari Road, Matunga, Bombay through its Establishment Officer (R.C.). 3. The Chairman The Maharashtra State Electricity C/o : Prakashgad, Plot No. G-9, Bandra East, Bombay – 51. .... RESPONDENTS Mr. N.P.Patil (Jamalpurkar), Advocate for petitioner. Mr. V.D.Rakh, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. Mr. A.M.Gaikwad, Advocate for respondent no. 2 &３. 2 W.P. 1217/1994 & 1223/1994 ( J ) WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1223 OF 1994 Shivaji S/o Bajirao Magar Age : 32 Yrs., Occ. Service, R/o : M.S.E.B. Colony, Solapur Road, Osmanabad Tq. & Dist. Osmanabad. .... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. State of Maharashtra Through the Govt. Pleader High Court of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad. 2. The Maharashtra State Electricity Board, Estrella Batteries Expn. Building Ground Floor, Plot No. 1 Dhavari Road, Matunga, Bombay through its Establishment Officer (R.C.). 3. The Chairman The Maharashtra State Electricity C/o : Prakashgad, Plot No. G-9, Bandra East, Bombay – 51. .... RESPONDENTS Mr. N.P.Patil (Jamalpurkar), Advocate for petitioner. Mrs. R.K.Ladda, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. Mr. A.M.Gaikwad, Advocate for respondent no. 2 &３. 3 W.P. 1217/1994 & 1223/1994 ( J ) CORAM : B.R. GAVAI AND S.V.GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE : 06/07/2010 ORAL JUDGMENT : [ PER – B.R. GAVAI, J. ] 1. By way of present petitions, the petitioners challenge the process of selection conducted by respondent nos. 2 and 3 for the post of Assistant Engineers pursuant to the advertisement dated 1/3/1993. 2. The petitioners are Degree holders, working as Junior Engineers in the erst-while M.S.E.B. The petitioners have filed the present petition challenging the selection process held for filling the post of Assistant Engineers on the ground that though the petitioners were eligible, they were not called for interview and as such their valuable right is vitiated. 3. It is the further contention of the petitioners that the reservation exceeded 50 % posts of the total vacancies and as such same is illegal and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 4. In the affidavit in reply, it is clearly stated that out of the posts of Assistant Engineers, 60 % were to be filled in by promotion from Degree holders, 25 % by promotion from Diploma holders and 15 % by direct recruitment from Degree holders. It can clearly be seen that in so far as filling up post by promotion from Junior Engineers as Degree holders is concerned, the competent authority has decided the zone of consideration to be 5 times as that of number 4 W.P. 1217/1994 & 1223/1994 ( J ) of vacancies. It was, therefore, found that since 18 posts were filled for open category, the zone of consideration was of 90 candidates and as per the seniority list, only the candidates up to Sr. No. 1400 would be considered. It is categorically stated in the affidavit in reply that the petitioners are at Sr. Nos. 1839 and 2079 respectively. It can thus clearly be seen that since the petitioners were much below in the seniority list and were not in the zone of consideration, they had no right to be considered for promotion. 5. In so far as second contention regarding reservation for 50 % is concerned, from the affidavit it is clear that there was backlog of 18 posts, which was carried forward. Since it is not the case of the petitioners that the reservation for the vacancy occurring in a particular year exceeded 50 %, the contention in this respect is without substance. 6. In that view of the matter, no merit is found in the petitions. The petitions are dismissed. Rule is discharged. [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA ] [ B.R. GAVAI ] JUDGE JUDGE knp/WP 1217,1223.94