PANJIM: The High Court of Bombay at Goa on Wednesday set aside the selection of associate professor of Goa Engineering College as Principal of Government Polytechnic and to restrict the recommendation of the Goa Public Service Commission (GPSC) to the petitioner, who is the sole candidate on the waitlist.
The Court also directed the State government to decide on the recommendation of GPSC in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and in any case within three months from the date of the order.
The petitioner Pramodini Naik alias Pramodini Gaonkar of Mayem had challenged the selection and recommendation by the GPSC of Samarth Borkar, associate professor of department of electrical and electronics, GEC, Farmagudi to the post of principal in Government Polytechnic.
Arguing of behalf of the petitioner, Adv Rohit Bras De Sa said that the Borkar had no experience of minimum three years as the head of department (HoD) or equivalent and that he was ineligible for the appointment of the said post as of Nov 25, 2022 i.e, the last date for filing applications.
Adv De Sa told the Court that the respondent was never appointed as HoD and therefore had no experience as HoD. Borkar was appointed as associate professor on December 20, 2019 and that as of November 25, 2022, he had not completed three years of experience although the pay scale of an associate professor and the HoD was the same.
GPSC counsel Adv D Lawande submitted that AICTE’s notification does not provide that a year means exactly 365 days but it provides that the candidate is paid Grade Pay as an associate professor which is equivalent to HoD and therefore the respondent fulfilled the essential qualification as prescribed in the advertisement.
He said that on the last day of filing applications, Borkar fell short by only 19 days but on the date of interview he made good of the shortfall and was fully qualified to be considered for the post.
Representing the respondent, senior advocate S D Lotlikar submitted that shortfall of hardly 19 days made no difference to his eligibility requirement as it was made up on the date of interview. He pointed out that the government was yet to consider the GPSC recommendations and that the petitioner’s plea that she be appointed was misconceived.
The division bench comprising Justice Mahesh S Sonak and Justice B P Deshpande found that the respondent fell short of the required experience of minimum three years by 19 days and declined to accept the GPSC’s contention about the experience not being required to be counted by mathematical exactitude.
