1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.8049 OF 2009 Shaikh Iqbal s/o Sk. Mohammad ..PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Mah. & anr. ..RESPONDENTS Mr P.N. Sonpethkar, Advocate for the petitioner; Mr K.G. Patil, a.G.P. for respondent - State. CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND S.V. GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE : 24th March, 2010 PER COURT : This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India impugns the order passed by the Aurangabad Bench of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal dismissing the Original Application filed by the petitioner. The petitioner had sought employment on compassionate ground but the appointment came to be refused to the petitioner on the ground that at the time of appointment the petitioner was age-barred. The challenge of the petitioner to the impugned decision did not find favour with the Tribunal and the Tribunal also dismissed the Original Application filed by the petitioner. 2. The requirement of law is that at the time of appointment the person to be appointed should not be age barred. This is spelt out in the Govt. Resolution dated 23.4.2008. Since it is the requirement of law that at the time of appointment the candidate should not be age-barred, we do 2 not notice any perversity in the reasoning of the Tribunal to warrant any interference in this writ petition. 3. This writ petition thus being devoid of any merit is summarily dismissed with no order as to costs. ( S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.) ( P. V. HARDAS, J.) amj/wp8049.09