Mumbai: Suspended officer drags MERC to HC for ‘hiring ineligible candidate’

The writ of Quo Warranto filed by the petitioner is considered a rare occurrence. Representation pic

A suspended section officer, Pradeep Mohare, of the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (MERC) has questioned the appointment of an under-experienced individual to the post, which subsequently led to the individual's promotion as under secretary and denied the same to Mohare. Last week, Mohare filed the rare writ of Quo Warranto (calling upon a person to explain under what authority of law, he was occupying a public post) before the Bombay High Court (HC).

Mohare's petition claimed that the individual's appointment violated the MERC (Recruitment and Conditions of Services of Employees) Regulation 2007.

Acting on another complaint, the MERC formed an internal panel which determined that there were flaws in the under secretary's recruitment. No action was taken against the appointed employee as the flaws were not his fault. On the other hand, the office of the Accountant General (Audit II), Maharashtra, too, questioned the appointment and sought MERC's explanation. With no action taken, Mohare moved the HC.

Mohare's advocate speaks

Mohare filed the writ against The State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, Industry, Energy and Labour Department, Mantralaya (Respondent 1), MERC, through its Chairman (Respondent 2) and Under Secretary (MERC) (Respondent 3).

Rajeshwar Panchal, the petitioner's advocate

Mohare's advocate, Rajeshwar Panchal, said, "The appointment of Respondent 3 on the post of section officer and subsequent promotion to the post of under secretary deprived Mohare of the legitimate right of promotion, as he had the qualification and work experience."

Mohare joined MERC as section officer on September 9, 2010. According to an advertisement by MERC in 2009, for the position of section officer, candidates were required to have a degree from a recognised university, experience of five years in administration or finance or law, and proficiency in written and verbal communication skills. Preference was to be given to candidates having more than five years of working knowledge of accounting procedure, tax matters, operating of accounting software and finalisation of accounts, establishment and administration.

"Respondent 3 (under secretary) applied for two posts. He was allegedly found ineligible for the post of clerk-typist-cum office assistant, which required experience of one year and a degree, but was found eligible for the post of section officer, which required five years' work experience and a degree. Yet he was appointed as a section officer," said Panchal.

"Even though the internal committee appointed by MERC found that Respondent 3 was ineligible, he was promoted to the post of under secretary. The file was closed without taking any action," Panchal said.

Panchal continued, "Even though the Accountant General (Audit II), Maharashtra called for clarification on the appointment, Respondent 3's service was regularised. This violates a state government circular of August 25, 2005 and a Government Resolution of October 12, 1993," Panchal added.

Mohare's petition includes remarks from 2018 from the internal committee set up by MERC. The questions raised by the Accountant General (Audit II), Maharashtra were revealed in an RTI raised by Anilkumar Ukey in 2022.

According to the petition, Respondent 3 passed B.Com from Mumbai University in 2006 and claimed experience of five years and ten months in 2009. This cannot be possible as experience is reckoned from the date of attaining the minimum required educational qualification. Further, no supporting documentation was submitted by him. As such, the appointment was irregular ab initio.

Mohare told mid-day, "I am not authorised to speak to the media. My advocate Rajeshwar Panchal has already filed both the writs in Bombay HC and I am sure justice will prevail," said Pradeep Mohare.

Two petitions in court

"Our petition seeks issuance of writ of quo warranto nullifying the appointment of Respondent 3, who didn't have the required qualifications as per Recruitment Rules. A writ of certiorari has been filed challenging my client's unlawful suspension," said Advocate Panchal.

"The petition is likely to be listed for hearing very soon. Recently, the Nagpur Bench of High Court of Bombay issued a writ of quo warranto and nullified the appointment of one person appointed by MERC. This would be the second such case coming before the HC. The inspection report of the Auditor General also shows other cases of appointments of individuals despite them not having the qualifications," Panchal said.

Attempts made to contact MERC did not yield any result.