1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.2219 OF 2010 Dattarao s/o Bhujangrao Sontakke ..PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Mah. & ors. ..RESPONDENTS Mr H.V. Patil, Advocate for the petitioner; Mr K.G. Patil, A.G.P. for respondents no.1 to 3. WITH WRIT PETITION NO.2207 OF 2010 Dattarao s/o Bhujangrao Sontakke ..PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Mah. & ors. ..RESPONDENTS Mr H.V. Patil, Advocate for the petitioner; Mr K.G. Patil, A.G.P. for respondents no.1 to 3. CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND S.V. GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE : 18th March, 2010 PER COURT : Both these petitions have been filed at the instance of the petitioner who seeks issuance of a writ of mandamus to the respondents for deciding the representation of the petitioner and to cancel the approval granted to respondent no.6 in both the petitions. According to the 2 petitioner, respondent no.6 in both the petitions have secured employment by producing fabricated and forged documents pertaining to their caste status. It is also urged before us that the petitioner though is an office bearer of the society has been kept at bay by the other office bearers and has not been taken into confidence. The petitioner avers that he has erroneously learnt about the forgery committed by respondent no.6. It is urged before us that on the basis of the complaint of the petitioner the Education Officer had stopped the salary of respondent no.6 but subsequently the salary came to be resumed as it was informed by the Education Officer by the office bearers that the complaint in respect of the respondent no.6 in both the petitions had been withdrawn by the office bearers. 2. We do not see any merit in both the petitions and consequently the petitions stand dismissed , however, with a liberty to the petitioner to submit a detailed representation to the respondent Education Officer with a direction to the Education Officer to consider the representation in accordance with law. We also grant liberty to the petitioner to avail the other alternate remedies available to the petitioner in law. The petition is thus dismissed with no order as to costs with the aforesaid liberty. ( S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.) ( P. V. HARDAS, J.) amj/wp2219.10