JUDGMENT : Sandeep V. Marne, J. 1. By this petition, petitioners challenge application of principle of reservation while flling up the post of Dean, Municipal Medical Institution, Group-A, MCGM and seek directions to allow candidates from Open Category to participate in the selection process. 2. Maharashtra Public Service Commission (MPSC) issued advertisement dated 16th November, 2022 convening selection for filing up the post of Dean, Municipal Medical Institution, Group-A, MCGM. One post of Dean is advertised which is reserved for Scheduled Caste. Petitioners belong to open category and are aggrieved by the decisions of MCGM and MPSC in reserving the advertised post. Application of principle of reservation is questioned essentially by contending that the post of Dean is a solitary post. Therefore the principle of non-application of principle of reservation to a solitary post is invoked. 3. Appearing for the petitioners, Dr. Chandrachud, the learned Counsel would submit that one post of Dean is available in each of the four Hospitals of the M.C.G.M., each of which being a solitary post. He would submit that the post of Dean does not bear transfer liability as incumbents functioning as Deans have not been transferred from one Institute to another, except in one instance during Covid-19 pandemic. He would submit that, since there is no interchangeability and transferability of the incumbents occupying the post of Dean, that post is required to be treated as a solitary post. 4. Relying on the judgment of the Constitution Bench in Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh Versus Faculty Association and Others, (1998) 4 SCC 1 , Dr. Chandrachud would contend that principle of reservation cannot be made applicable while filing up a solitary post. He would also rely upon the judgment of the Apex Court in State of Uttar Pradesh and Others Versus. Bharat Singh and Others, (2011) 4 SCC 120 and would urge that the facts in that case are almost similar to the one involved in the present case. Lastly, Dr. Chandrachud would rely upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in R.R. Inamdar V/s. State of Karnataka and Others, (2020) 19 SCC 543 in which again the Apex Court has reiterated the principle that reservation cannot be applied while filing up a solitary post. 5. Per-contra, Mr. Lastly, Dr. Chandrachud would rely upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in R.R. Inamdar V/s. State of Karnataka and Others, (2020) 19 SCC 543 in which again the Apex Court has reiterated the principle that reservation cannot be applied while filing up a solitary post. 5. Per-contra, Mr. Bukhari the learned Senior Advocate appearing for M.C.G.M. would oppose the petition submitting that there are four posts of Dean in four Institutions, which cannot be treated as solitary posts. He would submit that such four posts of Dean in four Institutions constitute a common cadre. Inviting our attention to the Recruitment Rules of the post of Dean, Municipal Medical Institute, Mr. Bukhari would contend that the post is to be filled in by methods of promotion and nomination and that while effecting promotions, all Professors in the Municipal Medical Colleges are considered through a common seniority list. He would further submit that the incumbent occupying the post of Dean can be transferred from one institute to another and places reliance on two such transfer orders issued in the past. He would submit that not only the post of Dean is filled up through a common seniority list of Professors, the further promotional list of Director is also filled through a common seniority list of Deans. Inviting our attention to petitioners’ admission in their rejoinder about their no objection to the filling up posts of Dean in the ratio of 50:50 (50% promotion and 50% nomination), Mr. Bukhari would contend that such an admission itself implies existence of more than one posts of Dean. 6. Rival contention of the parties now fall for our consideration. 7. The main dispute involved in the present petition is whether the post of Dean in Municipal Medical Institutions is a solitary post or not. There can be no debate to the proposition that principle of reservation cannot be made applicable while fling up a solitary post. The Constitution Bench in Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research (supra), has expounded law in this regard, which has been followed in numerous other decisions. Mr. Bukhari also does not dispute this proposition. However, what he disputes is Petitioners’ assertion that the post of Dean is a solitary post. It is therefore necessary to examine whether the post of Dean is indeed a solitary post. 8. Mr. Bukhari also does not dispute this proposition. However, what he disputes is Petitioners’ assertion that the post of Dean is a solitary post. It is therefore necessary to examine whether the post of Dean is indeed a solitary post. 8. There is no dispute to the position that there exists four posts of Dean in four Medical Institutions operated by M.C.G.M. as under: (i) K.E.M. Hospital and G.S. Medical College; (ii) L.T.M.G. Hospital and L.T.M.M. College, Sion; (iii)B.Y.L. Nair Hospital and Topiwala Medical College; (iv) R.N. Cooper Hospital and HBT College. While petitioners contend that each of such posts is a solitary post, the M.C.G.M. disputes the position by contending that there is a common cadre of four posts of Dean. To decide the rival contentions, it would be necessary to examine the manner in which the post of Dean is to be filled up. M.C.G.M. has placed on record Recruitment Rules for the post of Dean, Municipal Medical Institutions, which provides thus :- “Recruitment Rule for the post of Dean, Municipal Medical Institution. Appointment to the post shall be made either - (A) by promotion from among Professors or Directors/Professors in the Municipal Medical Colleges possessing the qualifications prescribed below for appointment by nomination OR (B) by nomination To be eligible for appointment by nomination a candidates must :- (i) unless already in the service of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay in full time capacity be not more than 50 years of age (55 years in the case of candidates belonging to the Backward Classes); (ii) possess M.B.B.S. degree of a statutory University or any other qualification specified in the first or second schedule to the Indian Medical Council Act 1956; (iii) possess- (a) a post-graduate degree in the Medical faculty from a statutory University or Fellowship/Membership of the Royal Colleges of Physicians/Surgeons/Obstetricians land Gynecologists accepted by the Medical Council of India as equivalent to M.D. or M.S. degree of a statutory Indian University. (b) have experience of teaching as Professor/Associate Professor/Reader in a recognized Medical Institution for not less than 10 years, out of which at least five years should be as Professor. (c) possess adequate knowledge of Marathi so as to be able to speak, read and writ Marathi with facility. Provided that the age limit may be relaxed in case of candidate possessing exceptional qualifications or experience or both.” (emphasis supplied) 9. (c) possess adequate knowledge of Marathi so as to be able to speak, read and writ Marathi with facility. Provided that the age limit may be relaxed in case of candidate possessing exceptional qualifications or experience or both.” (emphasis supplied) 9. Thus the post of Dean can be filled both by promotion and nomination. Though we are not able to decipher from bare reading of the Recruitment Rules that quota of 50:50 is prescribed for promotion and nomination, there is an assertion by M.C.G.M. to this effect in its affidavit, which is not disputed by the petitioners. The very fact that the posts of Dean are to be filled by promotion and nomination in a ratio of 50 : 50, itself would indicate that there are multiple posts of Dean. Quota of 50:50 cannot be applied to a solitary post. Furthermore, while filling up the posts by promotion ‘all Professors in Municipal Medical Colleges’ are to be considered. Thus, it is not disputed that a vacant post of Dean in a particular Institute is to be filled by considering Professors all institutes and not from amongst Professors of that Institute alone. M.C.G.M. has placed on record common seniority list of Professors of all Medical Colleges in which the names of petitioners are also borne. If the post of Dean of a particular Institute was indeed a solitary post, Professors of other Institutions could not have been considered, while filling such post by promotion. To make things worse for the petitioners, a common seniority list of Deans of four Institutions is also maintained by M.C.G.M. Such common seniority list, is placed on record at Exhibit-B2, the Affidavit in-reply of M.C.G.M. This common seniority list of Deans is utilized for effecting further promotion as Director. 10. The above position is not disputed by the petitioners. However, the only distinction sought to be done by Mr. Chandrachud during the course of his submissions is that the post of Dean is not transferable. It is submitted that, excepting one instance of transfer during Covid-19 Pandemic, Deans have never been transferred from one Institute to another. MCGM on the other hand contends that there have been multiple instances of such transfers. In addition to transfer effected during COVID-19 pandemic, it has placed on record order dated 1st August, 2016 by which Dean of LTMG Hospital was handed over additional charge as Dean of Cooper Hospital. MCGM on the other hand contends that there have been multiple instances of such transfers. In addition to transfer effected during COVID-19 pandemic, it has placed on record order dated 1st August, 2016 by which Dean of LTMG Hospital was handed over additional charge as Dean of Cooper Hospital. Though the order is not in the nature of transfer, the same does indicate that Dean of one institute can hold charge of another institute. It is therefore difficult to hold that incumbents holding posts of Dean do not bear transfer liability. They in fact constitute a common cadre. 11. Reliance is placed by Dr. Chandrachud on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Bharat Singh (supra), particularly on paragraph-56, which reads thus : “56. Last but not the least is the fact that the post of Principals in different aided/affiliated institutions is not transferable or interchangeable. Interchangeability of the post and transferability of incumbents to another post in the same cadre are essential attributes of a cadre, which is in the instant case absent. Reference in this connection may be made to the Uttar Pradesh Aided Colleges Transfer of Teachers Rules, 2005 framed by the State Government in exercise of its powers under Section 32 of the U.P. Higher Education Services Commission Act, 1980.” (emphasis supplied) 12. It is submitted that as the post in Bharat Singh was not transferable or interchangeable in, the same was held to be a solitary post by the Supreme Court. It is submitted that applying the same analogy, the post of Dean in the present case is also required to be treated as a solitary post. However, a closer scrutiny of the judgment in Bharat Singh would indicate that the same is clearly distinguishable. In that case, the issue was about the posts of Principal in different Colleges owned by different managements affiliated to same university. Whether mere affiliation with the same University would throw all posts of Principal in different colleges owned by different managements into the same hotchpotch for application of principle of reservation was the issue before Supreme Court. The employers in that case were distinct and therefore the Supreme Court has held that the authorities (State Government) under the Act, would not substitute themselves as employer of the persons appointed. The employers in that case were distinct and therefore the Supreme Court has held that the authorities (State Government) under the Act, would not substitute themselves as employer of the persons appointed. It has further been held that no power is vested in the State Government or other authority to transfer principals from one Institute to another. It is in these facts that the Supreme Court has held that there was no cadre of Principals serving in different aided and affiliated Institutions and that the post of Principal was a solitary post in each Institute. In the present case, the facts are entirely different. There is admittedly a common employer viz. M.C.G.M. The incumbent occupying the post of Dean bears transfer liability. The vacant post of Dean can be filled by consideration of all Professors working in four different Institutions whose names are borne on a common seniority list. Even in respect of Deans, a common seniority list is maintained. Thus, the judgment in Bharat Singh (supra), would have no application to the facts and circumstances of the present case. 13. We have therefore no hesitation in holding that the four posts of Dean in four different Institutions of M.C.G.M. form a common cadre and that therefore the post of Dean is not a solitary post. The respondent-Municipal Corporation, has correctly applied the principle of reservation while filling up the posts. 14. No interference is warranted in the impugned action of reserving advertised post of Dean. Writ Petition is devoid of merits. It is dismissed without any orders as to costs.