1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.479 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra and others .. Petitioners Versus Ravikiran Bhujangrao Vaidya ..Respondent Mr.K.J.Ghute Patil, Assistant Govt.Pleader for petitioners Mr.A.S.Deshpande, Advocate for respondent WRIT PETITION NO.662 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra and others .. Petitioners Versus Dipesh Bhikamlal Chandel .. Respondent Mr.K.J.Ghute Patil, Assistant Govt.Pleader for petitioners Mr.A.S.Deshpande, Advocate for respondent WRIT PETITION NO.3919 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra and anr. .. Petitioners Versus Dipesh Dilip Shirodkar .. Respondent Mr.K.J.Ghute Patil, Assistant Govt.Pleader for petitioners Mr.A.S.Deshpande, Advocate for respondent WRIT PETITION NO.4010 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra and anr. .. Petitioners Versus Vilas Shivaji Ghugare .. Respondent 2 Mr.K.J.Ghute Patil, Assistant Govt.Pleader for petitioners Mr.M.R.Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND N.D.DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 12th July 2010 PER COURT : 1. All these petitions question the order passed by the Aurangabad Bench of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal allowing the original applications filed by the respective respondents challenging the decision of the competent authorities declining to accept their certificates. 2. It appears that an advertisement came to be issued by the petitioners inviting applications for various posts, out of which 5% posts of Police Constables were reserved for candidates belonging to Sports category. The advertisement clearly spell out those candidates who would be eligible to apply from this category. The advertisement limits the candidates to those who have participated in (1) State level competitions [inter-district competition] and who have been awarded medals; (2) Represented in the inter-university events; (3) Represented in the State level events; and (4) Represented in the international events. 3. Since the facts in all these petitions are common, we advert to the facts in Writ Petition No.479 of 2010. In the present case, the respondents herein had participated in Kho-Kho game in the inter- university event. The certificates are appended to the present petitions. 3 The competent authorities turned down the said certificates on the ground that the Government Resolutions, issued by the Government from time to time did not include representation in inter-university events. The respondent herein, therefore, aggrieved by the decision of the authorities holding them as ineligible to be considered for appointment from the category of Sports persons, filed Original Application No.58 of 2008 before the Aurangabad Bench of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal, by its order which is impugned in the present petitions dated 1.9.2009 allowed the original applications. Mr.K.J.Ghute Patil, learned Assistant Government Pleader has urged before us that though the advertisement in no uncertain terms holds candidates as eligible who have represented the university in the inter-university events, yet since the inter-university events are not included in the Government Resolution, the Tribunal was in error in allowing the original applications. Mr.A.S.Deshpande, learned Counsel for the respondents has supported the order of the Tribunal. 4. A reference to the advertisement would clearly indicate that representation of the university in the inter-university events has been held to be an event which would entitle the candidate who had represented the university to be considered for appointment. The advertisement enlists about 28 events, of which Kho-Kho is an event included at item No.9. The respondents herein had represented the university in inter-university Kho-Kho event and as such, according to us 4 the respondents can be said to have fulfilled the terms of the advertisement. The Tribunal has proceeded on these lines and after perusal of the findings of the Tribunal, we cannot fault the reasoning of the Tribunal. 5. There is no merit in the present petitions and these petitions are, therefore, summarily dismissed with no orders as to costs. ( N.D.DESHPANDE, J.) ( P.V.HARDAS, J.) (vvr/479.10wp)