MAT raps state over 'pick-and-choose' approach in assistant public prosecutor appointments

Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar: The Aurangabad bench of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal has pulled up state govt for adopting a “pick-and-choose” approach while verifying the character and antecedents of assistant public prosecutor Group A candidates, and directed it to appoint three MPSC-selected candidates whose appointments were withheld despite their selection.A division bench of Justice V K Jadhav and member (administrative) Vinay Kargaonkar held that govt had applied inconsistent standards during police verification, appointing candidates with similar or more serious criminal antecedents while denying appointments to others without valid reasons. The tribunal observed that such differential treatment was arbitrary and violated Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.The Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT) directed the state to issue appointment orders within eight weeks to advocates Dnyaneshwar Baburao Chandrawanshi of Hingoli, Vishal Tanaji Adkine of Hingoli and Pravin Subhash Wagh of Latur, with notional seniority from Jan 2, 2025, though without back wages.The order pertains to the 2022 MPSC recruitment process for 531 assistant public prosecutor (APP) posts.

While 491 candidates were initially appointed, appointments of 33 candidates were kept on hold pending character verification. Of them, 27 were later cleared, leaving only a few candidates, including the four applicants before the tribunal, disqualified.In the applications moved before the MAT, Chandrawanshi and Vasmate were represented by Advocate Amol Gandhi, while Adkine and Wagh by Advocate Ganesh Gadhe.In Chandrawanshi’s case, the tribunal noted that he had secured honourable acquittals in two criminal cases, with courts recording that no offence was committed and that he had been falsely implicated. It found fault with the authorities for terming the acquittals as “technical” while appointing another similarly placed candidate.Adkine, who had been acquitted in an Atrocities Act case involving nearly 50 accused, was denied appointment due to the nature of allegations.

The tribunal held that authorities focused on the gravity of the offence in general rather than evaluating his specific role, despite appointing candidates acquitted in corruption and attempt-to-murder cases.The tribunal also ruled in favour of Wagh, observing that the complaint against him had not progressed to the stage of cognisance or trial. It held that govt rules on character verification did not permit disqualification at such a preliminary stage.However, MAT denied relief to applicant Madhukar Ramchandra Vasmate, against whom a dowry death case under IPC sections 498-A and 304-B is pending. The tribunal held that withholding his appointment was justified given the seriousness of the prosecution.Relying on Supreme Court rulings, including Avtar Singh vs Union of India and Mohammed Imran vs State of Maharashtra, the tribunal reiterated that while govt has discretion in assessing suitability for sensitive posts, such discretion must be exercised uniformly and cannot be used for arbitrary discrimination among similarly placed candidates.