Indrapal Singh And 41 ORS. v. Union Of India And 22 ORS.

- 1 - (wpl 891 of 2015) vat

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) No.891 OF 2015 Indrapal Singh and Ors.

...Petitioners

Vs.

Union of India and Ors.

...Respondents

*********** Mr.Harihar Bhave a/w. Mrs. Rupa Bhave and Mr. Abhijit Pange i/b. Bhave & Co. for Petitioners Mr.Suresh Kumar for Respondent No.1-UOI Mr.Amir Arsiwala i/b. Mr.Samir Khedekar for Respondent No.2 *********** CORAM : V. M. KANADE & A.R. JOSHI, J.J.

DATE : APRIL 30, 2015 P.C. :

1.

Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents. 2.

By this petition, the Petitioners are seeking a direction, directing Respondent Nos.1 to 4 to allot all the vacancies of Respondent Banks guaranteed in financial year 2013-14 to the successful candidates. 3.

The learned counsel for Respondent No.2 has raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the petition. It is submitted that this Court was already held that Respondent No.2 is not 'State' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India in the judgment and order passed by this Court on 5th May, 2014 in 1/2

- 2 - (wpl 891 of 2015) group petitions being Writ Petition (L) No. 1042 of 2014 a/w. Writ Petition (L) No.1045 of 2014 a/w. Writ Petition (L) No.1309 of 2014. It is not in dispute that Respondent No.2 is not "State" under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. In view of this for the reasons stated in the order, we are of the view that the Respondent No.2 not being "State" and it is not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence, writ petition is dismissed, reserving the right of the Petitioners to exhaust an alternate remedy which is available in law. Interim order is vacated. [A.R. JOSHI, J.] [ V. M. KANADE, J.] Vaishali Tikam 2/2