1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3184 OF 2007 Ranjana W/o Muktaram Manore .. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents Shri P. S. Koshti, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri K. B. Choudhari, Addl.G.P. for the Respondent No. 1. The respondents No. 2 to 5 served. Shri V. P. Golewar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 6. CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL, AND N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 15TH MARCH, 2010. ORAL ORDER [Per NARESH H. PATIL, J. ] : . Heard. 02. Petitioner challenges the appointment of respondent No. 6 as Anganwadi Sevika. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that some of the members did not allot any marks to the 2 petitioner. They ought to have allotted some marks. 03. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 6 submits that she secured 268 marks and other candidates above the petitioner secured 228 and 231 marks. 04. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 6 submits that the appointment orders were issued in the year 2006 and the respondent No. 6 is appointed as Anganwadi Sevika. The petition is filed in the year 2007. 05. Considering the marks obtained by the successful candidates and the petitioner, we find gross difference. In the facts of the case, no interference is required by this Court in exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petition is dismissed. [ N. D. DESHPANDE, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] bsb/Mar.10