Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

SOMANATH BHAGWAN GOREversusHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THR. ITS REGISTRAR GENERAL AND ORS

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The Court held that the petitioner must be included in the 2023 recruitment list and may attend the training program, subject to the standard appointment procedure.

Summary

The petitioner, Somanath Bhagwan Gore, was placed first on the waiting list for the 2023 judicial recruitment process. Two candidates, Ms. Sneha Hanamant Bhand and Ms. Vidya Dipak Pawar, who had been listed for 2023, were ordered by the Supreme Court to be placed in the 2022 selection, creating two vacancies in the 2023 list. The petitioner argued that his name should now be included in the 2023 list. The High Court noted that the Maharashtra Public Service Commission and the State follow a prescribed procedure for recommendation, verification, and appointment, and that the removal of the two candidates clears the vacancies. Consequently, the Court directed that the petitioner be admitted to the 2023 selection and allowed to attend the training program commencing 26/09/2026, subject to the normal appointment process. No further directions were deemed necessary.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner, being first on the waiting list, is entitled to be included in the 2023 recruitment list after the removal of two candidates transferred to the 2022 selection process.
  • Whether the petitioner may be permitted to participate in the training program for 2023 candidates pending completion of the appointment formalities.

Subjects

  • judicial recruitment
  • waiting list
  • appointment procedure
  • Maharashtra Public Service Commission
  • training program
  • Supreme Court order
  • High Court

Judgment

                                                     1/6          907-IA-7491-26-IN-WP-7132-26.odt

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                           CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                       INTERIM APPLICATION NO.7491 OF 2026
                                                       IN
                                          WRIT PETITION NO.7132 OF 2026

                         Somanath Bhagwan Gore                            .... Petitioner

                                       versus

                         High Court of Judicature at Bombay
                         through its Registrar General & Ors.             .... Respondents
                                                        …....

                         •     Dr. Uday Warunjikar a/w Mr. Sumit Kate a/w Ms. Sonali
                                Chavan, i/b. Hrishikesh Nabar, Advocate for Applicant in
                                IA/Petitioner in WP.
                         •     Dr. Milind Sathe, AG a/w Ms. Amruta Nerlekar i/b. Mr. Rahul
                                Nerlekar, for the Respondent No.3/The Bombay High Court.
                         •     Mr. O. A. Chandurkar, Addl. GP a/w Ms. Gauri Raghuwanshi,
                                AGP, for the State/Respondent.
                         •     Mr. Ashutosh Kulkarni a/w Mr. Hrutik R. Chavan a/w Mr.
                                Soham Salunke, Advocate for Respondent No.2/MPSC in
                                WP/7132/2026.

                                           CORAM       : SARANG V. KOTWAL &
                                                         RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, JJ.
                                           DATE        : 24th SEPTEMBER, 2026

                         P.C. :


MANUSHREE
                         1.            This is an application in a disposed of Writ Petition
NESARIKAR

Digitally signed
by MANUSHREE
                              No.7132 of 2026. The order dated 28/08/2026 in the Writ
NESARIKAR
Date: 2026.09.24
16:41:33 +0530
                              Petition records paragraph Nos.2 and 3 as follows :

             Nesarikar
                    2/6            907-IA-7491-26-IN-WP-7132-26.odt




“2.            The learned Senior Advocate appearing
for the High Court, Dr. Sathe, submits that the
above    stated       candidates     namely     Ms.      Sneha
Hanamant Bhand and Ms. Vidya Dipak Pawar have
now qualified and are appointed in the 2022
selection process, being at serial Nos.113 and 114
referred to by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
paragraph no.5(i) of its order dated 19 th August,
2026. Therefore, both these Petitioners before us
today, who were in the 10% waiting list of
candidates at Serial No.1, Mr. Somanath Bhagwan
Gore and at Serial No.2, Mr. Rakesh Shamrao Mali,
would be included in the list of selected candidates
in    view     of    the   above     peculiar    facts    and
circumstances.


3.             Considering the above fact situation,
both these Petitioners shall be deemed to be
included against the available two vacancies for
the     2023        recruitment     process.     The     State
Government shall process these names and make
the    recommendation         by     following     the    due
procedure provided in law, for facilitating their
appointment as Judicial Officers.”
                             3/6           907-IA-7491-26-IN-WP-7132-26.odt

2.            With these directions, the Applicant’s above Petition

     was disposed of. Now this Interim Application is preferred

     because the grievance of the Applicant i.e. the original Petitioner

     Somanath Bhagwan Gore, is that his name is still not included in

     the list published in the 2023 recruitment process.



3.            Heard Dr. Uday Warunjikar, learned Counsel for the

     Applicant/Petitioner, Dr. Milind Sathe, learned AG for the

     Respondent No.3, Mr. O. A. Chandurkar, Addl. GP for the State

     and Mr. Ashutosh Kulkarni, learned counsel for Respondent

     No.2.



4.            The basic controversy arose because the two candidates

     namely Vidya Dipak Pawar and Sneha Hanamant Bhand were

     included in the list of 2023 recruitment process. However, by

     virtue of the order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court their

     names were directed to be published in the 2022 selection

     process. They continued to be shown as successful candidates in

     the 2023 recruitment process and therefore the Petitioner's

     name who was at waiting list No.1 could not be and was not

     included in the 2023 recruitment process.
                             4/6          907-IA-7491-26-IN-WP-7132-26.odt




5.            Today a revised list of candidates eligible for

     recommendation for the 2022 selection process is produced

     before us. It is dated 23/09/2026. It is taken on record and

     marked ‘X’ for identification. In that list, the names of the two

     candidates Ms. Sneha Hanamant Bhand and Ms. Vidya Dipak

     Pawar are included at serial Nos.115 and 116. Consequently,

     their names will have to be removed from the list of 2023

     process and as a further consequence, there would be two

     vacancies which can be filled by the candidates at waiting list

     Nos.1 and 2. The present Applicant is at waiting list No.1 and

     therefore he is expected to be included in the selection list for

     the 2023 process.



6.            Learned AG appearing for the Administration of this

     Court submitted that there is a process for selecting and posting

     the candidates. There are different steps.



              They are as follows :
                            5/6           907-IA-7491-26-IN-WP-7132-26.odt

              The    Maharashtra      Public    Service     Commission

     recommends candidates and sends the list to the State of

     Maharashtra for issuance of appointment notification. The State

     of Maharashtra then calls for verification of documents and

     police verification. If any query arises regarding a particular

     candidate, the State of Maharashtra seeks opinion of the High

     Court regarding the appointment of such candidate. After

     obtaining the opinion of the High Court, the State of

     Maharashtra issues the notification of appointment in respect of

     the recommended candidates. The notification is placed before

     the Hon’ble The Chief Justice for posting orders and thereafter

     posting orders for the selected candidates are issued and they

     are sent for training at Maharashtra Judicial Academy, Uttan.

     Learned AG submitted that this process will take some time.



7.            The fresh notification for the 2022 selection process

     was issued on 23/09/2026. Consequently, now those two posts

     for 2023 process will be given to the candidates at waiting list

     Nos.1 and 2, which includes the present Applicant who is at

     waiting list No.1. This will be subject to the process referred to
                            6/6             907-IA-7491-26-IN-WP-7132-26.odt

     by the learned AG. In view of the fact that the two candidates

     from the 2023 list are already accommodated in the list for 2022

     selection process, there is no difficulty in including the

     Applicant’s name in the 2023 selection process, subject to the

     above process. Therefore no further directions are necessary. The

     only difficulty that remains is that the training program for 2023

     candidates is due to start from 26/09/2026. Therefore, in the

     interest of justice and to facilitate the entire process, the

     Applicant is permitted to take part in that training program. He

     shall be permitted to participate in the training program, which

     starts from 26/09/2026. His participation in the training

     program shall be subject to the process referred to by the

     learned AG.



8.            The   Applicant     shall   attend   and   report    to   the

     Maharashtra Judicial Academy, Uttan on 26/09/2026.



9.            The application is disposed of.




(RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.)               (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.