gopi 1 wp-lodg-1382-11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION LODGING NO.1382 OF 2011 Dhanjeet Kumar Kaushal Roy ..Petitioner Versus Union of India & Anr. ..Respondents Mr. Akshay Patil with Mr. Satendra Kumar for the petitioner. Mr. H.V. Mehta, for the respondents. CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C. J. AND GIRISH S. GODBOLE, J. 2 August 2011 PC: The grievance of the petitioner in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is that the petitioner is eligible to be appointed to the post of Lascar (OD), Group C, non-gazetted under respondent No.2 in the category of Orthopedically Handicapped candidates and the respondent No.2 ought to have appointed the petitioner on the said post in the above category. 2. In the affidavit in reply filed by the Senior Administrative Officer working in Naval Dockyard, Mumbai it is stated that as per the Statutory Recruitment Orders the incumbent of the post of Lascar (OD) must know swimming and should have passed Matriculation from the recognized Board/Institution. It is further stated that though all candidates including the candidates in the physically handicapped category are required to know swimming, the candidates who are not physically handicapped, they are required to swim 25 meters within 25 gopi 2 wp-lodg-1382-11.sxw seconds, but for the physically handicapped candidates there is no time limit fixed to complete swimming, but their performance in the swimming is judged. It is further stated that the petitioner’s performance was not satisfactory in swimming so was the case in respect of 9 other candidates. Four candidates whose performance found satisfactory have been recommended for selection, but the other 10 candidates including the petitioner have not been selected on account of poor performance in swimming. 3. Having regard to the fact that 14 posts of Lascar (OD) are reserved for physically handicapped category and only 4 could show satisfactory performance in swimming and that 10 other candidates have not been recommended for appointment due to what was considered to be “poor swimming performance” on 30 March 2011, we are of the opinion that the interests of justice would be served if this petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioner and all other physically handicapped candidates who appeared for the test on 30 March 2011 are given one more opportunity for swimming test with written advance intimation of at least four weeks so as to ensure that they get written information of the date of the test at least four weeks before the actual test is conducted. We direct accordingly. Writ Petition disposed of accordingly. CHIEF JUSTICE GIRISH S. GODBOLE, J.