Shivraj Pandharinath Patil v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

wp10477.14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 10477 OF 2014 Shivraj Pandharinath Patil

...Petitioner

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra & ors.

...Respondents

.....

Shri S.R.Kolhare, advocate for petitioner Shri V.S.Badakh, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2 Shri A.S.Reddy, advocate for resp.nos.3 and 4 .....

CORAM : S.S.SHINDE AND SANGITRAO S.PATIL, JJ.

DATED : 21st JULY, 2016 PER COURT :- Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

The reason assigned by the Education Officer while rejecting the proposal for approval to the appointment of the petitioner is that the management instead of filling the post from the Scheduled Tribe category, proceeded to appoint the

wp10477.14 petitioner who does not belong to any reserved category.

3.

In our prima facie opinion, the management ought to have adhered to the reservation policy and should have advertised the post for the candidates from the Scheduled Tribe category. 4.

In that view of the matter, we do not think that we can exercise our discretion or the petitioner is entitled for equitable relief.

5.

Hence, the petition stands rejected.

However, it will be open for the petitioner to make representation to the higher authorities of the Education Officer to pursue his cause that by virtue of rendering services he has acquired some status.

(SANGITRAO S.PATIL,J.) (S.S.SHINDE,J.) dbm/wp10477.14