IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 388 OF 2009 SHRI. MOHAN R. KAVLEKAR ... Petitioner Versus M/S. GOA SHIPYARD LIMITED THROUGH CHAIRMAN AND 2 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. A.V. Nigalye, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.S.S. Usgaonkar, Senior Counsel with Mr.Sudesh Usgaonkar, Advocate for respondent no.1. Coram:- NARESH H. PATIL & N. A. BRITTO, JJ. Date:- 11th January, 2010 P.C. Heard. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that adverse remarks for the year 2005-06 and 2006-2007 are not based on actual facts. He has been sincerely discharging his duties and the officer who had written adverse remarks had some prejudice against the petitioner. Representation was made by the petitioner to the M.D. which was decided. The Learned Counsel submits that a reasoned order has to be issued. Reliance was placed by the Learned Counsel on the Judgment of the Apex Court in Dev Dutt V/s. Union of India & ors. (AIR 2008 SC 2513) (para 40). 3. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that representation was considered in accordance with law and a decision was taken by the M.D. and the same was communicated to the petitioner. In the facts of the case we do not find any error on the part of the M.D. in making the decision. We do not see any fault in the decision making process. 4. In future, if the petitioner finds that he has been treated by superior officers with prejudice, he may bring the facts to the notice of his superiors. 5. In exercise of extra ordinary jurisdiction we do not find that interference is called for by this Court. Writ Petition is dismissed. NARESH H. PATIL, J. N. A. BRITTO, J. oc