1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3443 OF 2006 Ripai Berojgar Sangharsh Samiti ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and another ...Respondents ..... Mr. Tiwari h/f Mr. N.L. Chaudhari, advocate for the petitioner Mr. V.H. Dighe, A.G.P. for respondents. ..... CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR & S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATED: 12TH JANUARY, 2010 PER COURT:- 1 Having regard to the explanation offered in the affidavit in reply filed by the Assistant Commissioner (BC Cell), in his affidavit dated 16.7.2007, it is difficult to accept the claim of the petitioner. The argument of the petitioner that to accommodate Other Backward Class reservation provided as of now, for S.C. and S.T. to be reduced, cannot be countenanced. That is so, because the Government has taken a policy decision keeping in mind the population ratio and more so to ensure that the total limit of reservation does not exceed 2 permissible percentage of 52%. Taking over all view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the present petition, to call upon the respondents to cancel additional reservations, is devoid of merits. Petition is dismissed. ( S. S. SHINDE. J.) (A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.) rlj/