In Writ Petition No.6880 of 2014, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad dismissed a petition seeking appointment as a Project Affected Person. The petitioner had applied under the open category and scored 80 marks, falling short of the 144-mark cut-off.
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 22-wp6880-14.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.6880 OF 2014
Vishal s/o. Venkatrao Madne..Petitioner
versus
The State of Maharashtra
and ors.
..Respondents
Mrs.SavitaMadne(Narwate),advocatefor
petitioner
Mr.S.G.Karlekar, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 4
Mr.S.S.Dande, advocate for respondent nos.2 and 3
CORAM : S.S. SHINDE AND
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : MARCH 31, 2016
PER COURT :
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. He
submits that the petitioner is a landless person
and comes under the category of Projected Affected
Person and to that effect a certificate has also
been issued in his favour. He therefore submits
that the petitioner's candidature for the post
advertised, ought to have been considered by the
2 22-wp6880-14.odt
respondents by selecting and appointing him to the
said post.
2]Learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3,
relying upon the averments made in the affidavit-
in-reply filed by respondent nos.2 and 3 and in
particular, paragraph 9 thereof, submits that the
petitioner has applied from open category. He has
secured only 80 marks out of 180 in the written
examination conducted by respondent nos.2 and 3.
The cut-off list for the candidates from open
category is closed on 144 marks.
3]We have given careful consideration to the
submissions of learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner; learned AGP appearing for respondent
nos.1 and 4 and learned counsel appearing for
respondent nos.2 and 3. With their able
assistance, we have perused the pleadings and
grounds taken in the petition and averments made
3 22-wp6880-14.odt
in the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of
respondent nos.2 and 3.
4]It is not in dispute that the petitioner has
applied from the open category since no post was
reserved for the category of Project Affected
Persons. As submitted by learned counsel for
respondent nos.2 and 3 and as reflected in
paragraph 9 of the affidavit-in-reply filed by
respondent nos.2 and 3, the petitioner has secured
80 marks in the written examination conducted by
respondent nos.2 and 3. The cut-off list for the
candidates from open category is closed on 144
marks. In that view of the matter, we are unable
to grant any relief to the petitioner.
5]The petition deserves to be dismissed and the
same stands dismissed.
6]Needless to observe that, as and when the
respondents will issue an advertisement for the
4 22-wp6880-14.odt
category of Project Affected Persons, the
petitioner may apply.
[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.][S.S. SHINDE, J.]
kbp
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a petitioner seeking appointment as a Project Affected Person can be selected when they applied under the open category and scored below the cut-off marks.
Whether the petitioner qualifies for relief despite status as a Project Affects Person.
Vishal s/o. Venkatrao Madne
The State of Maharashtra
Mrs.SavitaMadne(Narwate)
Mr.S.G.Karlekar
Mr.S.S.Dande
S.S. Shinde
Sangitrao S. Patil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court