IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.9297 OF 2009 Mayakka A. More @ Sau. Mayakka K. Bobade ...Petitioner. v. Chairman, District Selection Committee & Anr. ...Respondents. Mr.V.B.Nighot , adv. For the Petitioner. Mr.V.A.Sonpal, Panel Counsel For the Respondents. CORAM : F.I.REBELLO & J.H. BHATIA, JJ. DATED : 12th November , 2009 P.C. 1 Rule. Heard forthwith. 2 It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to the advertisement, he had made an application and alongwith it, he annexed Demand Draft of Rs.200/- dated 22.8.2008. That D.D. seems to be encashed by the respondent on 31.1.09. In spite of the petitioner annexing DD with the application, application of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that DD was not annexed alongwith the application. 3 Considering the averments in paragraph 12, we propose to pass the following order: - 2 - i Respondents to enquire whether D.D.No.016368 as annexed to the petition dated 22.8.2008 of Rs.200/- has been encashed and credited to the account of the respondent no.1 on 31.1.2009. If it was so encashed then to treat the petitioner’s application as valid and treat his application as valid alongwith other valid applications. ii In the event, the amount has not been received and credited to the respondents’ account, petitioner’s application be treated as rejected. 4 Rule made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs. 5 Parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order. (J.H. BHATIA,J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)