Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

RESERVED ON: MARCH 10, 2023 PRONOUNCED ON: MARCH 20, 2023 JUDGMENT [Per Sandeep V. Marne, J.]:

THE CHALLENGE

1. The challenge in this group of writ petitions is to the common judgment and order 8th May, 2019 passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai (the Tribunal) in Original Application No. 1091 of 2015 along with connected 902-WPST-9195-2021 + (1) original applications. In the impugned judgment, the Tribunal has held the action of Maharashtra Public Service Commission (MPSC) in shortlisting candidates on the strength of possession of higher educational qualification as unsustainable. The action of shortlisting adopted by MPSC is interpreted by the Tribunal as en bloc elimination of candidates holding lower qualification of bachelor's degree in dental surgery (BDS). The Tribunal has also held that candidates having experience in private hospitals/clinics could also be considered for determining eligibility. The Tribunal has directed MPSC to revise the list of selected candidates and send additional names by including therein names of Original Applicants meeting the minimum prescribed qualifications.

4. In short, neither MPSC nor the Original Applicants are aggrieved by direction of the Tribunal for revision of the list of selected candidates and sending of additional names by including their names therein.

902-WPST-9195-2021 + (1) FACTS

5. A brief factual narration as a prologue to the judgment would be necessary. MPSC published advertisement / recruitment notice on 31st July 2015 for filling up 189 posts of Dental Surgeon. The eligibility criteria prescribed is bachelor's degree in dental surgery (BDS) with one year's experience as clinical assistant or in a post equivalent or higher than the post of clinical assistant. Advertisement prescribed preference to candidates possessing Post Graduate qualification in Dental Surgery (MDS).

7. It appears that there was confusion about the exact experience to be taken into consideration. MPSC, therefore, sought clarification from the Department of Health, Government of Maharashtra, as to whether candidates with experience in private hospitals/clinics could also be considered. On 1st October 2015, the Government of Maharashtra opined that private and academic experience 902-WPST-9195-2021 + (1) would also be considered by MPSC, which proceeded to consider candidates possessing experience in private hospitals/clinics. MPSC also applied the criteria of possession of higher educational qualifications (MDS) for shortlisting the candidates on the ground that the number of candidates, who applied, were quite large in number. This was apparently done under the provisions of the Maharashtra Public Service Commission Rules of Procedure, 2014 (Rules of 2014). It appears that the candidates who were already in service on contractual basis and possessing BDS qualification were not called for interview on account of shortlisting of candidates. They instituted series of original applications before the Tribunal for consideration of their candidatures in selection process. They also challenged Clause 4.6 of the advertisement as being contrary to the provisions of the recruitment rules. They also questioned the clarification issued by the State Government on 1st October 2015 qua the consideration of experience in private hospitals/clinics.

8. It appears that MPSC conducted interviews of shortlisted candidates and prepared a merit list on 18th November 2016. On the basis of merit list so prepared, MPSC recommended 188 names for being appointed on the post of Dental Surgeon. State Government issued appointment orders to such 188 candidates. However, only 122 out of said 188 candidates actually joined services, leaving behind several unfilled vacancies.

9. The Tribunal, by its interim order dated 1st March 2018 directed continuation of services of the original applicants. By further interim order dated 19th June 2018, the Tribunal 902-WPST-9195-2021 + (1) issued certain directions with regard to determination of eligibility of the selected candidates. The Tribunal by its interim order dated 21st December 2015 directed the MPSC and the State Government to interview the original applicants.