FARAD FARAD FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 165 OF 200 PETITION NO. 165 OF 200 PETITION NO. 165 OF 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- ---------------- Office Notes, Office Memorada Court‘s or Judge‘s orders or directions and Orders. Registrar‘s orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Shri P.G.Sawant with S.A.Rajshirke for the petitioner. Shri P.P.Kakade AGP for Respdt. CORAM; CORAM; CORAM; V.G.PALSHIKAR & V.G.PALSHIKAR & V.G.PALSHIKAR & V.R.KINGAONKAR, V.R.KINGAONKAR, V.R.KINGAONKAR, JJ. JJ. JJ. DTAED: DTAED: DTAED: 25TH APRIL,2006 25TH APRIL,2006 25TH APRIL,2006. P.C. 1. By this petition, the petitioner has impugned the order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal rejecting the Original Application of the petitioner. By that way, they prayed for a direction to the State Government to consider their claim, as per their priorities determined by the Government by earlier resolutions. This aspect was considered by the tribunal in another bunch of petitions and ultimately this court in W.P.No. 5957/05 and connected petitions, upheld the order passed by the tribunal. 2. The contentions of the petitioner is, he is entitled to be considered proportionately with other preferencial categories and the State need not wait for exhausting the employees of higher category of priority are appointed. This is a policy of the Government and the change can be brought about only by the Government. This court cannot in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226, requires the Government to change its policy. There is therefore no substance in this petition. The same is rejected. ...