Pratapsingh Tahalsingh Pujari v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

913 review.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 233 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 12536 OF 2015 Pratapsingh s/o Tahalsingh Pujari ... Applicant.

VERSUS

The State of Mahrashtra, and others.

... Respondents.

...

Mr. P.D. Shinde, Advocate for applicant.

Mr. S.G. Karlikar, A.G.P for respondent No.1.

CORAM

: S. V. GANGAPURWALA & K. L. WADANE, JJ.

DATE :

8th December, 2017 ORDER:

1.

The review is sought of the order dated 06.03.2017.

2.

Mr. Shinde, learned counsel submits that, the present applicant has secured opinion from experts i.e. Assistant Professor from Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, so also, the member of the Maharashtra Rajya Marathi Vishwakosh Nirmiti Mandal, stating that none is the correct option, however, if marks are to be given it should be given to option 'B'. So also opinion of Dr. Ambhure says that correct option 1/2

913 review.odt would 'B'. Learned counsel submits that in the M.P.S.C. examination held in the year 1997 for the same question, the correct option was given as 'C'. 3.

In the present matter the correct option as per the experts answer key is 'C'. The applicant had answered the option 'D'.

4.

While disposing of the writ petition we observed that this Court cannot sit over the decision of the expert, as this Court would not possess necessary expertise in Marathi literature. The opinions sought to be produced by the applicant show that there is no consistency in all these opinions. So also the correct option as per the answer key of the M.P.S.C. examination held in 1997 is the same as here i.e. 'C'. 5.

Considering the fact that the answers were assessed as per the answer key and the results were declared and the selection process conducted, no case for review.

6.

In the light of above, review application is dismissed. No costs.

(K. L. WADANE, J.) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ) mkd 2/2