FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE PIL NO.85 OF 2006 ------------------------------------:----------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Court’s or Judge’s orders. coram, appearances, Court’s orders : or directions and Registrar’s : orders. : ------------------------------------:------------------------------------ Ms.Preetam Tendulkar for petitioner. Mr.R.S.Apte with Mr.N.R.Bubna for resdpondent No.2. Mr.P.S.Cardoz, AGP for respondent No.1. ----- CORAM : H.L GOKHALE, ACTING C.J. & CORAM : H.L GOKHALE, ACTING C.J. & CORAM : H.L GOKHALE, ACTING C.J. & V.M. V.M. V.M. KANADE, J. KANADE, J. KANADE, J. DATED DATED DATED : 8th February : 8th February : 8th February 2007 2007 2007 P.C. : 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. This Petition is filed by a Journalist making a grievance about the selection of 169 Peons selected by the 2nd respondent-Nashik Zilla Parishad. Principally, two grievances are made, namely, that one of the candidates was stated to be a son of an employee of the Zilla Parishad and he is stated to have been selected though he had not even completed 18 years of age which is the minimum age required. 3. An Affidavit in reply has been filed wherein it is stated that this son of the employee by name Ganesh has been held ineligible and as far as his father Kamlakar Chavan is concerned, he has been suspended for suppressing the necessary information in the application of his son. 4. As far as the grievance that the relatives of the employees were selected, it is pointed out that only some 6 out of 169 candidates, who were selected, are relatives of the employees of the Zilla Parishad. That certainly is possible and merely because somebody is the relative of an employee in the Zilla Parishad, he cannot be barred from appearing for the test. 5. It is material to note that selection was on the basis of a written test and thereafter interview. The other grievance made is that at a particular Centre the Supervisors were helping the candidates while writing the papers. In Para-4 of the reply it is stated that all the candidates from that Centre failed. This being the position, there is no reason to entertain this Petition. Petition is dismissed. (ACTING C.J.) (ACTING C.J.) (ACTING C.J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)