FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5402 OF 2010 “Krishna s/o. Arjun Haral Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others.” Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 1 Mr. S.R. Barlinge, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. S.K. Tambe, AGP for the respondent No.1 Mr. U.B. Bondar, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 Mr. A.R. Nikam, Advocate for respondent No.4. --- CORAM :- B.R. GAVAI & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE :- 12th OCTOBER, 2010. --- 1] The petitioner has approached this court, contending therein that though the petitioner is eligible to be appointed from the category of Physically impaired person, and Hearing Impaired persons, since there was only one choice, he had applied from the Physically Impaired category. It is further submitted that since now the petitioner has noticed that the cut off for Hearing Impaired persons is less than what the petitioner has secured, he should also be considered from the said category. 2] It was open for the petitioner to have exercised his choice while making the application as to from which category he desires himself to be considered. After the selection process is over, a person cannot be permitted to say that since he does not FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5402 OF 2010 “Krishna s/o. Arjun Haral Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others.” Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 2 find place in the select list in the category from which he has chosen to appear, he should be considered from some other category, since the cut off in that category is lesser. If that is permitted, there can be no finality to the selection process and a person would keep changing his category from one category to another, as it suits him. 3] In that view of the matter, we are not inclined to entertain the petition in the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the writ petition is rejected. [A.A. SAYED, J.] [B.R. GAVAI, J.] grt/-