Bombay High CourtWP/12805/2016disposed offdismissed for default

Anil Dnyanoba Dahe v. The Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Through Its Managing Director And Others

2017-01-19Hon'Ble Shri Justice V. M. Kanade,Hon'Ble Shri Justice V.K. Jadhav2 pages

(1) W.P. No. 12805 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

Writ Petition No. 12805 of 2016 District : Parbhani Anil s/o. Dnyanoba Dahe, Age : 36 years, Occupation : Driver, R/o. Peth Mohalla, Kurhadi Galli, Manwat, Taluka Manwat, District Parbhani.

.. Petitioner.

versus

1. The Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Central Office, Maharashtra Transport Bhavan, Dr. Anandrao Naiar Marg, Mumbai - 08, Through its Managing Director.

2. The Divisional Controller, M.S.R.T.C., Parbhani Division, Parbhani, Dist. Parbhani.

3. M/s. Chankya Software Services, Venunagar, Wakad, Pune, Through its Authorized Officer. .. Respondents. ...........

Mr. Avinash A. Khande, Advocate, for the petitioner. ...........

CORAM : V.M. KANADE & V.K. JADHAV, JJ.

DATE : 19TH JANUARY 2017 ORAL ORDER :

Heard.

(2) W.P. No. 12805 of 2016 02.

The petitioner had applied for the post of Driver (Junior) in respondent no.01 - Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation. After appearing for written examination and vehicle driving test, the petitioner's name could not appear in the list of selected candidates. The petitioner is disputing the assessment of his performance in the written test as well as vehicle driving test done by the Corporation. Respondent no.02 - Divisional Controller by letter dated 02/03.09.2016 informed the petitioner about his non-selection and it is stated that the verification of answer-sheet has been done.

03.

It is submitted that this Court should direct the respondent - Corporation to make reverification of performance done by the petitioner in the said examinations.

04.

There is no rule or regulation for reverification of performance as prayed by the petitioner. We are, therefore, not inclined to give any such direction to the respondents, in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

05.

The Writ Petition is dismissed.

( V.K. Jadhav ) ( V.M. Kanade ) JUDGE JUDGE ...........

puranik / WP12805.16