IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 630 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO. 630 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO. 630 OF 2007 ALONGWITH ALONGWITH ALONGWITH WRIT PETITION NO. 631 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO. 631 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO. 631 OF 2007 AND AND AND WRIT PETITION NO. 632 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO. 632 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO. 632 OF 2007 Union of India & Anr. ] .. Petitioner Versus 1. Rajesh R. Godiyal & ors. ] .. Respondents Mr. Vinod Joshi for the petitioners in all the Writ Petitions. CORAM: S.B. MHASE & D.G. KARNIK, JJ. DATED: 07TH AUGUST, 2007 P.C. : . We have perused the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in Original Applications No.130, 131 and 132 of 2005. By this order, the petitioners are directed to regularise the services of the respondent. The only point which the learned counsel for the petitioners argued before us is that the respondents have not adduced any evidence to show that they were not appointed under the regular channel. However, the Tribunal has found that the necessary documents and especially the call letter from the : 2 : Employment Exchange which was received by the respondents was deposited by them with the petitioners and the petitioners have not denied the said fact. 2. Under these circumstances, if the documents are in possession of the petitioners, the petitioners cannot say that the respondents should produce evidence in respect their appointment. Except this, no other point was argued before us. 3. The Writ Petition is without any merit. It is hereby rejected. Sd/- Sd/- [D.G. KARNIK, J.] [D.G. KARNIK, J.] [D.G. KARNIK, J.] [S.B. MHASE, J.] [S.B. MHASE, J.] [S.B. MHASE, J.]