Sudhir Dnyanobarao Khade v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 48-WP1290-2020.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1290 OF 2020 Sudhir Dnyanobarao Khade .. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents Mr. Rupeshkumar C. Bora, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. P. G. Borade, AGP for Respondents-State.

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

DATED : 21st JANUARY, 2020.

PER COURT:- .

The application filed by the petitioner under the Right to Information Act is rejected. The appeal is also dismissed. 2.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has sought copy of the rules applicable and experts opinion pursuant to which objection to the answer key is rejected.

The appellate authority has observed that the information sought is totally not relevant. The reasons have been given for not disclosing the names of the persons i.e. the experts who have given the opinion for their security reasons.

2 48-WP1290-2020.odt 4.

Moreover, the answer key was published, the petitioner has raised objection to the answer key. The respondents after taking opinion of the experts have rejected the objection. If the petitioner has any grievance with objection raised by him, the petitioner can assail the same as may be permissible in law. There is no propriety in asking for the opinion of the experts on the basis which the objection of the petitioner is rejected.

In the light of the above, no case for interference is made out. Writ petition, as such is dismissed. No costs. ( SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI ) ( S. V. GANGAPURWALA ) JUDGE JUDGE P.S.B.