1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 54 OF 2009 Partapure Vaijyanath Dnyanoba ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents Mr. J.G. Reddy for the Petitioner Mr. C.R. Sonawane, Assistant Government Pleader, for Respondents No. 1 and 2. CORAM: B ILAL NAZKI and SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATE: APRIL 8, 2009 P.C.:- The petitioner sought appointment as Forest Guard against a Reserved Quota for Earthquake Victims. The Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal found that he was considered along with other similarly placed persons, and the applicant had secured 49.83% marks, whereas another candidate from the same category had secured 58.28% marks. Therefore, under this category, another person was selected. The selected candidate is respondent No. 3. He was not even a respondent before the Tribunal in the Original Application. 2 2. Now, this Writ Petition has been filed on the ground that respondent No. 3 had not annexed the requisite certificate that he was earthquake affected, along with his application. This ground was not taken at all before the Tribunal, and is being taken for the first time in this Court. When the petitioner got information about selection of respondent No. 3, when the counter was filed before the Tribunal in Original Application, he should have amended the Writ Petition and taken the ground that respondent No. 3 was not eligible. It is too late in the day to make such a grievance before this Court for the first time. Writ Petition is dismissed. BILAL NAZKI, J. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.