1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4512 OF 2009 Vijay s/o.Babanrao Ankushe Age-23 years, Occu-Nil, R/o.Pahadi Pargaon, Tq.Dharur, Dist. Beed PETITIONER VERSUS 1. State of Maharashtra, (Through its Secretary, General Administration Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32) 2. The Collector, Osmanabad. 3. The Residential Deputy Collector, Osmanabad. 4. Ravindra S/o.Bapurao Bhande, Age-Major, Occu-Nil, R/o.Near Solapur Janata Co.Bank, Main Road, Kalamb, Tq.Kalamb, Dist.Osmanabad. 5. Rahul S/o.Shambhaji Jadhav, Age-Major, Occu-Nil, C/o.B.S.Dhumal, Z.P.High School, Hathgaon (Bk.) Tq.Pathri, Dist. Parbhani RESPONDENTS Mr.V.A.Dhakane, learned counsel for petitioner. Mr.N.N.Jadhav, learned AGP for 1 to 3 2 Mr.A.A.Mukhedkar, learned counsel for respondent no.4 and 5 (CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.) DATE : 12/08/2009 ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per P.V.Hardas, J.) 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. By this petition under article 226 of The Constitution of India, the petitioner takes exception to the selection of respondent no.4 and 5 to the post of Clerk-Typist pursuant to an advertisement which came to be issued on 29/11/2008. In the said advertisement, 3 posts for N.T.B. category were reserved. Out of the 3 posts, one post was reserved for women candidate while 2 posts were reserved for male candidates. The footnote to the advertisement further stated that in the event, the posts reserved for female remain unfilled, male candidates belonging to that reserved category would be appointed. 3. In the present case, undisputedly the petitioner appeared for the written examination and after completion of the selection process, came to be placed in the said category i.e. N.T.B.Category at Sr.No.1 and second in overall merit list. Undisputedly, no female candidate belonging to the N.T.B. Category figured in the merit list. It appears 3 that subsequently there was a re-valuation of the answer papers of the candidates and accordingly the petitioner was displaced from Sr.No.1 in the N.T.B. Category and came to be placed at Sr.No.1 from the N.T.B.category in the wait list, and overall at Sr.No.2 in the wait list. The petitioner contends that the re-valuation of the answer papers of respondent no.4 and 5 has been done arbitrarily and respondent no.4 have answered the questions in Marathi and therefore they were not entitled to be awarded requisite marks. The respondents in their affidavit in reply have stated that no specific instructions had been issued to the candidates that they should answer in English and not in Marathi. In the light of that, according to us no interference on that score is warranted. 4. It was urged by Shri.V.A.Dhakane, learned counsel for the petitioner that as per the advertisement, it was provided that in case female candidates were un-available, the said post would be filled from amongst the male candidates. Since the petitioner is at Sr.No.1 in the wait list in respect of N.T.B. Category, according to the petitioner, the aforesaid yardstick ought to have been applied to the case of the petitioner and the petitioner would have been appointed. 5. We see considerable merit in the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner particularly in the light of the fact that there is no denial in the affidavit in reply. It is candidly agreed by the learned AGP appearing on behalf of the respondent no.1 to 3 that such a stipulation appears in the advertisement. In the light of 4 that therefore we are inclined to allow this petition to the limited extent of directing respondents to consider the petitioner for appointment to the post of Clerk-Typist which was reserved for female candidate as per the clause in the advertisement. The respondents may consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with Law being un-influenced by the fact that we have directed the respondents to consider the petitioner in the light of the advertisement, for being appointed on the post which was reserved for a female candidate. We make it clear that we are issuing the aforesaid directions principally on the ground that such a stipulation appears in the advertisement. The exercise to be carried out by the respondents within 4 weeks from today and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioner. 6. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) khs/AUGUST 2009/wp4512-09