Sachin Dadasaheb Sable v. The Union Of India And Others

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7297 OF 2019 Sachin Dadasaheb Sable Petitioner versus Union of India & others Respondents Mr. P.V. Barde, advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. M.N. Navandar, AGP for respondents No. 1 to 5. CORAM: PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, CJ & R.G. AVACHAT, J.

DATE: 27.09.2019 PER COURT :

1] The petitioner had applied for a job to a Group D post. Unfortunately for him, he did not fill up the online form concerning details of the Indian Postal Order or Demand Draft submitted by him along with the application. This resulted in the petitioner not being considered for appointment and his application was rejected.

- 2 - 2] Counsel urges that being an error in not filling up the form correctly, the petitioner should not be visited with a penal consequences. Respondents urge that keeping in view the fact that for 5740 posts 9,77,613 of applicants submitted applications, technology was the only answer for the administration to manage such large number of applications. 3] In computers which are specifically programmed to process the applications without human interference, the applications are processed. In the Era of Information and Technology, people have to accept the fate of their mistakes, how so ever trivial they may be. Administrative convenience serves the public interest in such cases because the applications are processed fast.

4] This is the view taken by a Division Bench of this Court on 22.10.2018 in Writ Petition No. 1624/2018 pronounced at Principal Seat of this Court at Bombay. The decision notes that for 5740 Group D posts, 9,77,613 applications were received.

- 3 - 5] Writ petition is dismissed.

(R.G. AVACHAT, J.) CHIEF JUSTICE dyb