1 217 wp 3629.99.doc k IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3629 OF 1999 Misbah-ul-Haq Abdul Aziz Shaikh ..Petitioner. Vs. The District Collector & Chairman of District Selection Committee, Solapur & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr. S.G. Kudle for the Petitioner. Mr. C.R. Sonawane, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 3. Mr. Haribhau Deshinge i/b Mr. Nitin Jamdar for respondent no.2. Mr. Vijay Killedar for respondent nos.4 to 6. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, K.K. TATED, JJ. Date : 22/11/2011. PC: 1 By this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner has challenged the selection of Respondent nos.4 to 6 as Health Workers (male) on the ground that their selection was made in breach of the guidelines contained in Government Notification dated 1st August, 1998 issued by the Public Health Department, Maharashtra State, Mumbai. 2 217 wp 3629.99.doc 2 The Petitioner claims that he was more meritorious candidate than respondent nos.4 to 6. It is further contended that respondent nos. 4 to 6 were not holding required qualification so also the experience for appointments as Health Workers. 3 Mr. Kudle, learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset invited our attention to the notification dated 1st August, 1998, to contend that the respondent – Zilla Parishad while selecting respondent nos.4 to 6 have committed breach of the conditions mentioned therein for an appointment on the post of Health Workers (male) and on this ground alone the appointments of respondent nos.4 to 6 deserve to be cancelled/set aside. He submits that the Petitioner comply with all the requirements for the appointment as Health Workers contemplated by the said notification dated 1st August, 1998. 4 Respondent no.2 and Respondent nos. 4 to 6 have filed their reply affidavits. Respondent no.2 – Zilla Parishad has stated in their reply affidavit that the notification on which the Petitioner is relying upon for challenging the appointments of Respondent nos.4 to 6 would not apply to the Zilla Parishad and that they are governed by 3 217 wp 3629.99.doc the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad Services (Recruitments) Rules, 1967. The affidavit further states that they followed due procedure for selection and that after selection, the selected candidates were appointed and joined in 1999 itself and they have been working since then without any interruption. 5 We have perused the notification dated 1st August, 1998. The notification was issued by the Public Health Department/Service, Mantralaya, Mumbai and by this notification certain amendments were carried out to the Public Health Services, Health Workers (Male), Block ‘C’ for the purpose of entry in the Service Rules, 1977. Learned counsel for the Petitioner has not placed before us the said Rules. The Petitioner has also not placed on record the advertisement by which the selection process was initiated. In view thereof, it is not clear as to what were the terms and conditions one required to fulfill for an appointment as Health Worker. The notification dated 1st August, 1998 was issued by the Public Health Department of the State Government. From the notification it is not clear whether it applies to Zilla Parishads also. Neither the Petitioner nor the learned advocate appearing for the Petitioner has placed any material on 4 217 wp 3629.99.doc record to show that this notification would apply for appointments as Health Workers by Zilla Parishads. In the absence of any such material and in view of the facts that the Zilla Parishads and their Services Recruitment Rules in place it would not be possible to accept the submissions of learned counsel for the Petitioner. That apart, we also do not find any reason to disbelieve the statements made on affidavits by the respondents that respondent nos.4 to 6 fulfilled all the required conditions for their appointments as Health Workers (Male). In the circumstances, we find no merit in the Writ Petition. Writ Petition is dismissed. Rule discharged. No costs. (K.K. Tated, J.) (D.B.Bhosale, J.)