In a writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction to appoint him as a Gram Sevak on a contract basis, alleging he missed the interview due to no call letter. The court found no ground for interference and rejected the petition.
None; petition rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 467 OF 2012
Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Coram: B. R. Gavai, and or directions and the Sunil P. Deshmukh, JJ. Registrar's orders.
Date: 15.03.2012
Shri Arun H. Koralkar, Advocate, for the Petitioner. Shri K.M. Suryawanshi AGP, for Resp. Nos. 1 and 3. Shri S.S. Dambe, Advocate, for Resp. Nos. 2 and 4.
as Gram Sevak on contract basis. It is the contention of the petitioner that though he was successful in the written test, he could not appear for oral interview as he did not receive call letter.
No case made out for interference. Petition rejected.
(Sunil P. Deshmukh, J.)
(B. R. Gavai, J.)
pnd/wp-467.12
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court should direct the respondent to appoint the petitioner as a Gram Sevak on a contract basis.
FARAD
Respondent 1
Respondent 2
Respondent 3
Respondent 4
Sunil P. Deshmukh
B. R. Gavai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
