1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.300 OF 2009 (Yashpal s/o Dawachand Rahangdale vs. The President of District Selection Committee and others) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : D.D. SINHA AND A.P. BHANGALE, JJ. DATED : JUNE 17, 2009 Heard Shri Charlewar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Shri Khubalkar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent nos. 1 and 4, and Shri Kapgate, learned Counsel for the respondent nos. 2 and 3. Shri Charlewar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, states that respondent no.3 Zilla Parishad initiated process of filling up vacancies of Gram Sevak by publishing advertisement in this regard. There were 29 vacancies to be filled in, out of which 2 three vacancies were reserved for physically handicapped candidates and out of them, one was for deaf and dumb candidates. It is submitted that petitioner, who belongs to deaf and dumb category, appeared in written examination as well as personal interview. It is contended that if petitioner was not successful in written examination, the respondent no.2 District Selection Committee could not have called him for personal interview. The very fact that petitioner was called for personal interview shows that petitioner was eligible to be considered for the post of Gram Sevak and, therefore, action of the respondent Authorities rejecting candidature of the petitioner for the said post is bad in law. Shri Kapgate, learned Counsel for the respondent nos. 2 and 3, does not dispute that recruitment process was initiated for filling up vacancies of Gram Sevak and three posts were reserved for physically handicapped category, out of which one post was for candidates belonging to deaf and dumb category. It is contended that as per Government Resolution dated 27.6.2008, candidates, 3 who were entitled to be included in the list of selected candidates, were required to obtain minimum 45% marks in their written examination as well as personal interview even though the candidate belongs to reserved category. It is further submitted that so far as petitioner is concerned, the marks obtained by him in the entire process of selection, which includes written examination as well as personal interview, were 25.75% and since percentage of marks obtained by the petitioner were less than the one prescribed in the Government Resolution, petitioner’s name could not be included in the select list. We have considered the rival contentions of the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the Government Resolution. It is not in dispute that petitioner secured 25.75% marks in the selection process and the minimum percentage of marks required for being considered for appointment on the post of Gram Sevak was 45%. Merely because petitioner was permitted to appear in the personal interview, that does not render the requirement under 4 the Government Resolution nugatory. No case is made out for showing indulgence. The petition is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE khj