1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION No. 3429/2011. The State of Maharashtra and others. -VERSUS- Netaji Pralhadrao Wakode _______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. ______________________________________________________________________________ CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & P.D. KODE, JJ. DATED : JULY 21, 2011. Heard Shri Fulzele, learned A.G.P.for petitioners. The order of Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal dated 27.07.2009, granting 18.12.1989 as deemed date for promotion to present respondent has been questioned before this Court on the ground that the change in seniority list was infact correction of an inadvertent error. In the alternative, it is urged that the seniority list after it’s correction was circulated in the year 1988 and hence, Original Application as filed 2 in the year 2000 was barred by limitation. With the assistance of learned A.G.P., we have perused the papers in original application as filed. The respondent has specifically contended that, his application is within limitation as prescribed under section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act. The said assertion has been dealt with by stating that it is a matter of record and therefore, calls for no reply. It is therefore, obvious that no challenge to the original application on the ground of limitation was raised before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. Consideration by Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal in paragraph no.3 onwards reveals that suddenly the respondent was brought down in the seniority list and his juniors were shown above him. Facts which necessitated that change have not been disclosed. The Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal has found that the reserved category [reservation] was taken into account and, therefore, there has been change. The Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal has found that present respondent also belonged to O.B.C. while one Shri 3 Gaikwad, belonging to open category and junior to him, was shown above him. The Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal has therefore, proceeded to work out the deemed date and gave it to the present respondent. In absence of appropriate explanation warranting such change in seniority list before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal itself, we are not in a position to appreciate the arguments being advanced. Writ Petition is, therefore, rejected. No costs. JUDGE JUDGE Rgd