← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/370/2018disposed of

Prajot Ramesh Sawant., v. State Of Goa, Thr. Chief Secretary And ANR.,

2018-04-17Hon'Ble Shri Justice N. M. Jamdar,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prithviraj K. Chavan3 pages

1 WP370-18dt 17-04-2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO.370 OF 2018 Mr. Prajot Ramesh Sawant ...

Petitioner

Versus

State of Goa & Anr.

.... Respondents Mr. Jitendra Supekar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. D. Lawande, Advocate General with Ms. P. Kalangutkar, Addl. Government Advocate for the Respondents.

Coram : N.M. Jamdar & Prithviraj K. Chavan, JJ.

Date : 17 April 2018.

P.C. :

By this petition, the Petitioner has sought a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to complete the recruitment procedure undertaken in the year 2016 and issue appointment order to the candidates.

2.

The Petitioner applied pursuant to an advertisement

2 WP370-18dt 17-04-2018 which was issued some time in April 2016. It is the case of the Petitioner that his documents were scrutinized and he has also received a call letter. According to the Petitioner, the written examination was conducted on 9 October 2016 but no results were declared. It is in this context, the Petitioner has sought the relief as above. 3.

Before we proceed to consider the reliefs sought by the Petitioner, we have to examine the conduct of the Petitioner whether the Petitioner is entitled to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. The Petitioner appeared for examination on 9 October 2016. After one year, he made an application to seek information. Thereafter he filed the petition in March 2018. There is absolutely no explanation for these laches in the petition. The petition does not even contain the usual paragraph regarding delay and laches. It is informed that the Petitioner become age barred a year ago. At the behest of the Petitioner who has not been diligent in prosecuting his rights and now stands age barred in view of his own inactions, the relief sought for cannot be granted.

4.

In the matter of recruitment in public service, the Court cannot focus only on the Petitioner before it, but has to be mindful of the multitude of the unemployed awaiting employment in the public

3 WP370-18dt 17-04-2018 service. No case is made out to grant a relief in favour of the Petitioner.

The Writ Petition is rejected.

Prithviraj K. Chavan, J. N.M. Jamdar, J.