GAJANAN BABULAL BANSODE & ORS. versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

Citation: [2021] 1 S.C.R. 478 · Decided: 05-02-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: L. NAGESWARA RAO · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
478
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 1 S.C.R.
   [2021] 1 S.C.R. 478
478
GAJANAN BABULAL BANSODE & ORS.
v.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 104 of 2021)
FEBRUARY 05, 2021
[L. NAGESWARA RAO, INDU MALHOTRA AND
VINEET SARAN, JJ.]
Service Law – Selection – To the post of Police Sub Inspector
– State of Maharashtra had issued the impugned G.R. without any
consultation or prior approval by Maharashtra Public Service
Commission (MPSC) – The impugned G.R. sought to fill up double
the number of vacancies notified for Limited Departmental
Competitive Examination (LCDE) – OAs filed challenging the policy
decision contained in the impugned G.R. – Maharashtra
Administrative Tribunal by interim order directed that status quo be
maintained with respect to 636 additional candidates whose list was
appended to the G.R. – Held: It is well settled in service jurisprudence
that the authority cannot fill up more than the notified number of
vacancies advertised, as the recruitment of candidates in excess of
the notified vacancies, would be violative of Arts.14 and 16 (1) of
the Constitution – Tribunal vacated the order of status quo, on the
ground that two of the applicants had participated in the
examination, but failed to qualify – This could not be a justifiable
ground to vacate the interim order, since promotional prospects of
the applicants/petitioners would be seriously prejudiced, as a block
of 636 additional candidates would be appointed as Police Sub-
Inspectors over and above the applicants – The other ground on
which the Tribunal vacated the interim order was that the applicants
had not challenged the G.R. – This is an erroneous observation
which would be evident from the prayers in the O.A.– The third
ground on which the Tribunal vacated the interim order was that in
similar O.As challenging the same G.R, the applicants in those cases
had withdrawn their respective cases, since they were desirous of
pursuing their representations with the State Government – This
could also not be a justifiable ground for vacating the order of
status quo merely because other parties had chosen to withdraw
their O.A. for their own reasons – High Court in writ petition has
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
479
issued a direction to the State to send the additional list of 636
candidates for training of 9 months during the pendency of
proceedings before the Tribunal – Such a direction ought not to
have been passed in writ petition – Direction now passed by Supreme
Court that the impugned G.R. will remain stayed during pendency
of proceedings before the Tribunal – Tribunal to decide the pending
O.A. within six months while ensuring that the additional 636
candidates are given notice of the pending O.A. through the State,
to enable them to appear and participate in the proceedings –
Tribunal further directed to club all pending Original Applications
challenging the impugned G.R. and pass a common judgment in
these cases – Police Sub-Inspector (Recruitment) Rules, 1995 – r.5
– Constitution of India – Art.320(3)(a).
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 104 of
2021.
From the Judgment and Order dated 06.03.2020 of the High Court
of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad in Writ Petition No.
15045 of 2019.
Vinay Navare, M.N.Rao, R.Basant, Sr. Advs., Ajay Deshpande,
Vinod Sangavikar, Anand Dilip Landge, M. Y. Deshmukh, Ms. Aaina
Verma, Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, Siddeshwar Namdev Biradar, Yash
Prashant Sonavane, Ms. Manjeet Kirpal, Manu Krishnan, Sachin Patil,
Rahul Chitnis, Aaditya A. Pande, Geo Joseph, Advs. for the appearing
parties.
The Order of the Court was passed by
INDU MALHOTRA, J.
1. The Government of Maharashtra issued a requisition on
02.06.2016 to the Maharashtra Public Service Commission (“MPSC”)
to conduct the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination(“LDCE”)
for selection of candidates to the post of Police Sub Inspector.
2. The Home Department, Government of Maharashtra vide
Government Circular dated 27.06.2016 notified 828 vacancies, out of
which 642 were from the open category, and 186 were from various
reserved categories, for promotion to the post of Police Sub-Inspector
through the LDCE– 2016.
GAJANAN BABULAL BANSODE & ORS. v. STATE OF
MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
480
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 1 S.C.R.
3. The selection was governed by the provisions of the Police
Sub-Inspector (Recruitment) Rules, 1995. The relevant Rules are
extracted hereunder:
“Rule 3: Appointment to the post of Sub-Inspector of Poli

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.