Prasad Vinayak Patil vs State of Maharashtra Throu. Chief Sec. Ministry of Transport (Msrtc) and Anr. ) — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Prasad Vinayak Patil vs State of Maharashtra Throu. Chief Sec. Ministry of Transport (Msrtc) and Anr. ) — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; the Petition was disposed off with an assurance that its disposal would not be an impediment if the Petitioner challenges the marks allotted to any other candidate, while no opinion was expressed on the maintainability of such a challenge.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Petitioner, aggrieved by the marks granted to candidates placed above him in the result of the MSRTC examination for 1647 posts of Driver-cum-Conductor, may challenge the marks granted to each of those candidates through a remedy permissible in law. +1 more

Court's answer

Since the Petitioner desires to avail of a remedy, as may be permissible in law (to challenge the marks granted to other candidates), this Writ Petition is disposed off.

Key takeaways

If the Petitioner challenges the allotment of the marks of any other candidate, the disposal of this Petition would not be an impediment; however, the Court expressly declines to express any opinion on the maintainability of such a challenge to the marks allotted to competitors who are above the Petitioner.obiter¶para 5

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 422 of 2024 (High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction; Ravindra V. Ghuge & Ashwin D. Bhobe, JJ., decided 17th February, 2025): Prasad Vinayak Patil v. State of Maharashtra & Anr. (Respondent No.2: MSRTC) — MSRTC Driver-cum-Conductor recruitment. By an order dated 7th February, 2025, made on the learned Advocate's instructions from MSRTC representatives present in Court, the Bench recorded that the results of the examination (for 1647 advertised posts of Driver-cum-Conductor) would be uploaded on the website by 11th February, 2025 and listed the Petition for 17th February, 2025 in the Disposal Category. At the resumed hearing the results stood uploaded, but the Petitioner remained aggrieved by the marks granted to other candidates and desired to challenge the marks granted to each of them through a remedy permissible in law. Since none of the candidates above the Petitioner in the result list was arrayed as a Respondent, and as the Petitioner opted to pursue such a remedy, the Bench disposed of the Writ Petition, observing that its disposal would not be an impediment to any future challenge to the marks allotted to competitors above the Petitioner, while expressly reserving opinion on the maintainability of such a challenge.

TRUPTI SADANAND BAMNE Digitally signed by TRUPTI SADANAND BAMNE Date: 2025.02.20 10:35:06 +0530

7-wp-422-2024.odt

Trupti

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 422 OF 2024

Mr.Prasad Vinayak Patil … Petitioner

versus

State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents

Ms.Heena Shaikh i/b. Mr.Jeevandatt M. Argade for the Petitioner.

Mr.P.P.Kakade, Addl.GP with Mrs. Pooja Joshi Deshpande, AGP for Respondent No.1, State.

Mr.Nitesh Bhutekar i/b. Ms.Priyanka Lanke for Respondent No.2, MSRTC.

Mr.Kailash Bhagat, DPO, Pune Division present.

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ.

DATE : 17^th February, 2025

P.C. :-

On 7^th February, 2025, considering the prayers of the

Petitioner, we had passed the following order :

“1. The learned Advocate for the MSRTC, submits on instructions from the representatives of the MSRTC, who are present in the Court, that results of the examination with reference to which the Petition has been filed, would be uploaded on the website and would be available for everyone to see, by 11^th February, 2025. The printout of the record is shown to us by the learned Advocate.

1 of 3

7-wp-422-2024.odt

Trupti

Considering the difficulty of the learned Advocate for the MSRTC, we are listing this Petition on 17^th February, 2025, in the Disposal Category. ”

The learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits that the

result has been uploaded on the official website of the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (MSRTC). The Petitioner is still aggrieved by the marks granted to other candidates and desires to challenge the marks granted to each of those candidates, by resorting to a remedy, as may be permissible in law.

The learned Advocate for the Respondent -MSRTC submits that none of the candidates, who are above the Petitioner in the result list, are arrayed as Respondents in this Petition. The MSRTC had advertised 1647 posts of Driver-cum-Conductor.

Since the Petitioner desires to avail of a remedy, as

may be permissible in law, this Writ Petition is disposed off.

If the Petitioner challenges the allotment of the marks of any other candidate, the disposal of this Petition would not be an impediment, though we are not expressing any opinion about the

2 of 3

7-wp-422-2024.odt

Trupti

maintainability of such a challenge to the marks allotted to competitors, who are above the Petitioner.

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

3 of 3