Bombay High CourtWP/4554/2016rejected at admission stage

Navnath S/O. Domaji Mangar v. President District Selection Committee And Collector Chandrapur And Others

2016-10-10Hon'Ble Shri Justice B.R. Gavai,Hon'Ble Shri Justice V.M. Deshpande3 pages

IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4554/2016 (Navnath s/o Domaji Mangar vs. President, District Selection Committee and Collector, Chandrapur & others ) .............................................................................................................................................. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders .............................................................................................................................................. Mr. S.S. Dhengale, Advocate for the petitioner Ms.N.P.Mehta, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent no.1 Mr. J.B. Kasat, Advocate for Respondent no.2 CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATED : 10th October, 2016.

Heard.

The petitioner has filed this petition, contending that his application has been erroneously considered from 'Open' category. It is the contention of the petitioner that the petitioner has paid the fees of Rs. 75/- which is applicable to reserved category candidate as against Rs. 150/- which is applicable to Open category candidate. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner though has erroneously shown his category to be Open and since he had paid the fees of Rs. 75/-, he should have been considered from reserved category of OBC.

Perusal of the application form would reveal

that the category shown by the petitioner is 'Open'. Perusal of the affidavit-in-reply would reveal that though the petitioner was shown as Open category candidate in the select list and though he was shown to be a wait-listed candidate in the open category at Sr.No.1, he has never objected that he was belonging to to reserved category and not Open category.

In that view of the matter, we do not find that a case is made out for interference. The petitioner should have been diligent enough while submitting his application form.

Rejected.

JUDGE JUDGE sahare

C E R T I F I C A T E "

and correct copy of original signed Judgment/Order." Uploaded by: N.B.Sahare P.S.

Uploaded on: 10.10.2016.