Panaji: The Bombay high court has dismissed a review petition filed by a man who sought appointment as an assistant professor in the department of biochemistry at Goa University, finding no grounds to revisit its earlier order of July last year.The petitioner had challenged his non-selection to a post advertised in 2020. Of the vacancies notified, two were reserved for OBC candidates. He secured 40 out of 100 marks, falling short of the cut-off of 50, and was therefore not selected. In his review plea, he claimed that a proper computation of marks would have taken his score beyond 50 and argued that he was entitled to a 5% relaxation as an OBC candidate, which was not granted.
He also questioned the eligibility of a candidate appointed in the general category, alleging that she had failed to submit a residency certificate by the last date in 2020 and had later produced a forged document. He sought action against her and claimed a legitimate expectation of appointment, either against the existing vacancies or any future vacancy.Rejecting these contentions, the high court held that there was no error warranting a review of its earlier judgment. It observed that a candidate appointed against an unreserved vacancy could not be displaced by an OBC candidate and noted that the selected candidate had acquired eligibility within the prescribed cut-off date. The court added that even if her appointment were set aside, it would not entitle the petitioner to appointment.The court also declined his plea for consideration against future vacancies, stating that such a request could not be entertained in a review petition when the original writ pertained solely to vacancies advertised on May 11, 2020.“Upon issuance of the appointment orders to the selected candidates, the said process now came to an end,” stated the division bench comprising Justices Suman Shyam and Amit S Jamsandekar.
