Dismissed

Devidas Ramchandra Tidke v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC18 Jan 2017WP/537/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, disposed of a writ petition challenging the petitioner's non-selection for the post of Fireman. The court held that the cancellation of marks due to the petitioner holding only a light motor vehicle license instead of a heavy one was lawful.

What did the court decide?

The petition stands dismissed as there is no infirmity or illegality committed by the respondents.

Devidas Ramchandra Tidke Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

1 44-WP537-17.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.537 OF 2017

¶4

Devidas Ramchandra Tidke,
Age:23 years, Occ. Student,
r/o. Bhogalwadi, Tq. Dharur,
Dist. Beed..Petitioner

¶5

Vs.
The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Secretary,
General Administration Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32
and ors...Respondents

¶6

Mr.G.G.Suryawanshi, Advocate i/b. Mr.S.C.Bhosle,
Advocate for petitioner
Mr.S.B.Yawalkar, AGP for respondent no.1

¶7

CORAM : V.M. KANADE AND
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : JANUARY 18, 2017

¶8

PER COURT :

¶9

Heard the learned Counsel for the

¶10

petitioner and the learned AGP for respondent no.1

¶11

2.The petitioner is aggrieved by selection
the process for the post of Fireman conducted by
the respondent/authority. It is the contention of
the petitioner that he is holding license to drive
heavy motor vehicle. It is submitted that

¶12

initially, 10 marks were given to the petitioner in
the physical test, but thereafter, those marks have
been cancelled.

¶13

3.We have perused the license issued in
favour of the petitioner. The said license
authorises the petitioner to drive light motor
transport vehicle. Since the petitioner does not
possess license to drive heavy motor vehicle, ten
marks of the petitioner were cancelled by the
respondent.

¶14

4.The petitioner has secured total 105 marks
in the eligibility test, however, since preference
was to be given to a person having license to drive
heavy motor vehicle, the petitioner has not been
selected.

¶15

5.In our view, no infirmity or illegality
has been committed by the respondents. The petition
stands dismissed.

¶16

kbp

Devidas Ramchandra Tidke v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devidas Ramchandra Tidke v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S R G Sanap Construction Company through Its Proprietor Raosaheb Govindrao Sanap Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Rasul Babaji Patel Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Padmaja Gulabrao More and Another Vs the Chief Election Officer Maharashtra Election Commission Mumbai and Others

Prataprao Gangadharrao Chavan and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shankuntala Zumbar Kale Vs the Chief Officer Municipal Council Osmanabad

Sheela Kishanrao Waghmare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others