The Bombay High Court at Goa has dismissed two petition challenging the appointment of Dr Anosca Lira Menezes, the daughter of the head of the department, to the post of Senior Resident in the Goa Dental College and Hospital.
The petitions alleged that the applicable rules provide precedence and not merely a preference to the candidates who have studied and have acquired a postgraduate degree through the Goa Dental College and Hospital.
“Since the petitioners have studied and acquired the postgraduate degree through the Goa Dental College and Hospital, they ought to have been selected and appointed as the Senior Residents in precedence of the Respondents who have, acquired the postgraduate degree of some other dental college and hospital from outside the State,” the petition alleged also adding that there was no transparency in the selection process and a defective advertisement was published and selection procedures were manipulated only to favour , daughter of the HOD in the concerned Department.
The High Court, while ruling that there were discrepancies in the advertisement issued, ruled that “the contention about malafides is not well established.”
“Just as no candidate must be favoured because she is the daughter of the HOD, such a daughter must also not be unduly punished or prejudiced on this count. Therefore, this fortuitous circumstance of birth and parentage must be irrelevant in selections for a public post. No material suggests that the HOD has played any role in the selection process. There are no pleadings about his alleged role. The allegation is vague and is denied,” the High Court bench of Justices MS Sonak and Bharat Deshpande ruled.
“There is some problem with the advertisement issued. But it would not be correct to say that this mistake has any nexus with the allegation of mala fides. The advertisement incorrectly refers to the preference requirement as a desirable qualification. Besides, it includes a reference to passing BDS from Goa College. Though these are mistakes, neither the petitioners nor the selected respondents suffered or gained anything from them. This is also not a case where some other candidates could have been misled into not applying due to such mistakes,” it said.
“The mistakes, though they should be avoided in future, do not appear to have had any significant bearing on the selection process this year. Therefore, based on such mistakes, the selection process does not need to be upset,” it also said.
