1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3687 OF 2010 Kaushalya Subhan Chavan ..Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. M. S. Topkar for Petitioner. Mr. C. R. Sonawane – AGP for State. CORAM : D. D. SINHA AND MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED : JUNE 09, 2010. P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The writ petition is directed against the order dated 1st September, 2009 passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal whereby the Original Application No. 556 of 2008 preferred by the petitioner came to be dismissed. 3. Considered the contentions canvassed by the learned counsel and perused the order passed by the Tribunal. The relevant observation made by the Tribunal in paragraph 16, reads thus : 2 “.......Thus, having regard to above mentioned authoritative pronouncements, it must be held that in the instant case, when the applicant had knowledge about the G.R. dated 19.10.2007, as there was reference of the said G.R. in the call letter for written examination and according to her, the candidates were to be selected only on the basis of written test, she should not have participated in the interview process, but that has not happened. It is only when, she secured less marks, now she has challenged the process of holding interview. She has to be estopped from doing so. Naturally, her application has to be dismissed.” The above referred observation makes it clear that the petitioner participated in the process of interview with the knowledge of Government Resolution dated 19th October 2007. The petitioner never raised any objection at the relevant time and questioned the procedure undertaken by the respondent only after the petitioner was declared unsuccessful in the said process. It is in these circumstances the view expressed by the Tribunal, in our view, is just and proper and needs no interference. Writ petition is dismissed. (D. D. SINHA, J.) (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)