Jitendra S/O Vishwanath Ukey v. The State Of Maharashtra, Through Its Secretary, Employment And Self-Employment, Mumbai And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WP No. 3995 of 2014 Jitendra v. The State of maharashtra and ors _______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

Mr Vivek Borkar, Adv for petitioner Mr C. N. Adgokar, AGP for respondents no. 1 to 4 and 6 CORAM : B. P. DHARMADHIKARI AND A. P. BHANGALE , JJ DATED : 6th January 2015 1.

Heard learned counsel for petitioner.

Learned counsel submits that respondent no. 5 was not eligible and still he has been appointed and as such, the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal could not have refused to condone delay. He also points out that respondent no. 5 is continuing in employment even today. According to him, candidate at sr. no. 1 in wait list is already accommodated in other category. 2.

However, petitioner is not in a position to submit that if respondent no. 5 is displaced, entitlement of the petitioner will be considered. Petitioner is also not in a position to point out the serial number at which he was placed in the Select List. 3.

In this situation, we do not find anything wrong with the order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal refusing to condone the delay.

4.

No case is made out warranting interference in writ jurisdiction. Petition is dismissed. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE joshi