1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4835 OF 2009 Shardul Shashikant Jahagirdar .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & Oths. .. RESPONDENTS Mr. R.R.Mantri, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. K.G.Patil , Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. ........................... CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, J. & S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 19/03/2010 PER COURT : 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, by which the petitioner prays for issuance of writ of certiorari for examining the recorded proceedings in respect of the advertisement dated 17/12/2008 issued in respect of 200 posts of Civil Judge (Jr.Division) as also the examination held on 29/3/2009 along with the question papers and other record. The petitioner prays for quashing of the out-come of the written examination. The petitioner prays for issuance of writ of prohibition restraining the respondents from holding the main examination for the recruitment of the posts of the Civil Judge (Jr.Division) and J.M.F.C. scheduled to be held on 16/8/2009. 2. At the out set, Mr. R.R.Mantri , learned counsel for the petitioner has very fairly pointed out and brought to our notice a Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court rendered in Writ Petition No. 2208 of 2007 dated 7/4/2008, to which one of us (P.V.Hardas, J.) 2 was a member. The Division Bench in the said Judgment was examining the challenge similar to the challenge raised in the present petition and the Division Bench in the said Judgment declined to entertain the said challenge on the ground that such an exercise was wholly impermissible under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Mr. Mantri has very fairly brought to our notice the said Judgment. 3. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties, we have perused the said Judgment rendered in Writ Petition NO. 2208 of 2007 and in the light of what has been held by us, according to us, it is impermissible to examine the challenge raised in the present petition in respect of the computerized key and the answers thereof, which were provided for evaluation of the answers given by the examinees. 4. In the light of the said Judgment, therefore, we dismiss the petition with no order as to costs. [ S.V.GANGAPURWALA ] [ P.V.HARDAS ] JUDGE JUDGE knp/WP 4835.09