.[1]. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1470 OF 2006 Prathamesh V. Shanbag and Anr. ...Petitioners. Versus The Director, Director of Medical Education & Research...Respondent. .... None for the Petitioners. Mr.P.M.Mokashi, A.G.P., for the State. .... CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND F.I.REBELLO AND F.I.REBELLO AND SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. DATED : JUNE 08, 2006. JUNE 08, 2006. JUNE 08, 2006. P.C.: . None present for the petitioners when the matter was called out. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that they could not appear for MHT-CET 2006 examination, on account of delay of trains. The respondents filed reply. It is pointed out that the petitioners are from Mumbai region and from Mumbai region 27538 candidates had applied and out of which 27047 candidates were present and 491 candidates were absent. The total number of candidates in the entire State of Maharashtra who .[2]. had applied for the examination was 157538 and those who appeared were 155800. In the Mumbai sub-region, the absentee is 1.7%. The fact that there would be some problem with the railway system was informed in advance over T.V. and the Press. The question is whether on account of that, this Court should interfere with the examination already held. As we have noted, lakhs of students all over the Maharashtra have appeared for the examination and the absenteeism was 1.7%. The corresponding absenteeism for the previous year was also 1.7%. 3. The fate of the students who had appeared cannot be left uncertain, as other students also knowing the difficulties, on those days made arrangements to appear at the examination centres on time. 4. We, therefore, do not think that it is a fit case to exercise our extra ordinary jurisdiction. Petition disposed of. [F.I.REBELLO,J.] .[3]. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]