wp1533.06 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.1533 OF 2006 Sunita Shahu Mirpagar, Age-34 years, Occu:Household, R/o-Kukdi Vasahat, Ghod Nadi, Tq-Shirur, Dist-Pune. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, 2) The District Collector and Chairman of District Selection Committee, Beed (for selecting candidates for the post of gramsevak on contract basis) 3) The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Beed and Member of District Selection Committee, Beed (for selecting candidates for the post of gramsevak on contract basis) 4) The Deputy Chief Executive Officer, (Panchayat Samiti) Zilla Parishad, Beed and Secretary of District Selection Committee (for selecting candidates for the post of gramsevak on contract basis) wp1533.06 2 5) The District Social Welfare Officer Grade-I, Beed, Tq. & Dist-Beed. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri.N.N. Shinde Advocate for Petitioner. Shri.S.V. Kurundkar, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri.N.L. Jadhav Advocate for Respondent No.3. ... CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND T.V. NALAWADE, JJ. DATE : 26TH AUGUST, 2011. ORAL JUDGMENT [PER NARESH H. PATIL, J.] : 1. The Petition is taken up for hearing on motion and by consent. 2. The Petitioner applied against advertisement issued on 18th January 2003, for recruitment of Gramsevak on contract basis. The Petitioner did not receive any communication from the authorities. She made representations to the concerned authority. Ultimately, the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Beed wp1533.06 3 communicated to her on 1st April, 2006 that her name is not included in the merit list as she was not found suitable to be selected. The Petitioner, aggrieved by the said communication, filed present Writ Petition which came to be admitted by this Court. 2. Learned counsel Shri. Shinde appearing for the Petitioner submits that the recruitment drive has already been completed and persons selected were appointed. 3. Shri. Jadhav, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.3 submits that nothing survives in this Petition to be contested, therefore, the Petition could be disposed of in the light of subsequent developments. 4. We have perused the record placed before us and reply filed by the Respondents. It appears that Petitioner's merit was assessed by the wp1533.06 4 authority and thereafter decision was taken accordingly. The posts are filled in. In this view of the matter, no interference in exercise of extra ordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article-226 of the Constitution of India is warranted. The Writ Petition is dismissed. Rule discharged. No costs. [T.V. NALAWADE, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] asb/AUG11