1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.2920 OF 2009 (Dinkar s/o Durgaji Urkande and others vs. The District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies and another) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : D.D. SINHA AND F.M.REIS, JJ. DATED : DECEMBER 11, 2009 Heard Shri Kulkarni, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Shri Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent no.1, and Shri Dangre, learned Counsel for the respondent no.2. Shri Kulkarni, learned Counsel for the petitioners, states that in the present petition, the grievance of the petitioners is in respect of recruitment process undertaken by the respondent no.2 for filling up the posts of Peon and Clerks for non-observance of 30% reservation meant for women 2 as well as procedure for allocation of marks and preparation of merit list. Shri Dangre, learned Counsel for the respondent no.2, states that grievance of the petitioners is misconceived. It is submitted that advertisement was issued on 1.7.2009 and though 30% reservation meant for women was not mentioned in the advertisement, however, corrigendum was issued by the respondent no.2 on 21.8.2009 wherein it is specifically mentioned that while conducting recruitment, 30% reservation meant for women shall be kept. Similarly, in the advertisement it was clearly mentioned that policy of Government mentioned in the Government Resolutions shall be followed in the process of recruitment. It is further contended that so far as allocation of marks was concerned, out of 100 marks, 25 marks were allocated for interview and 75% for written test. This was according to the procedure applicable. In the backdrop of these facts, the procedure followed by the respondent no.2 appears to be just and proper. 3 Shri Kulkarni, learned Counsel for the petitioners, further submits that financial position of respondent no.2 Society is not sound and, therefore, it is difficult for the respondent no.2 Society to shoulder additional burden of payment of salary of the persons, who will be recruited and, therefore, liberty may be given to the petitioners to approach the Government in this regard. Shri Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader states that contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioners is not correct. It is difficult for us to express any view in this regard in absence of proper data available before us and, therefore, we keep this issue open. In the circumstances, no case is made out for showing indulgence. The petition is dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. JUDGE JUDGE khj 4