IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 1359 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 1359 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 1359 OF 2008 Prakas Samanta ] .. Petitioner Versus 1. Union of India & 3 ors. ] .. Respondents Mr. Satendra Kumar for the petitioner. Mr. Satelkar with Mr. S.C. Pal i/b Dr.T.C. Kaushik for the respondents. CORAM: S.B. MHASE & A.A. KUMBHAKONI, JJ. DATED: 13TH JUNE, 2008 P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner has completed his thirty years as a Chief Petty Officer (for short "CPO"). Under the Service Rules, the maximum period permissible in the rank of CPO is 30 years, which the petitioner has exhausted. Even though the petitioner has been considered for promotion, he is not qualified as per the Rules for promotion because he requires VG conduct of four years, whereas he has only two years of VG conduct to his credit. Therefore, the petitioner has sought for : 2 : re-engagement invoking clause 16 of the Service Rules. That claim of the petitioner was considered by the respondents and it has been rejected. The said rejection order is challenged by way of this Petition. 3. Rule 16 reads thus: "Re-engagement is a service requirement; therefore, there is no provision to give re-engagement to the sailors only on compassionate grounds. However, while reviewing the re-engagement cases of deserving cases, the welfare of sailors is also given due consideration to the extent possible." 4. Hence, what we find is that there is a total discretion with the respondents which the respondents have properly exercised and the claim of the petitioner has been rejected. Therefore, there is no substance in the Writ Petition and it is, accordingly, rejected. Sd/- Sd/- [A.A. [A.A. [A.A. KUMBHAKONI, J.] KUMBHAKONI, J.] KUMBHAKONI, J.] [S.B. [S.B. [S.B. MHASE, J.] MHASE, J.] MHASE, J.]