1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION No. 4551/2010. Kalpesh Pundlikrao Waghmare -VERSUS- Zilla Parishad, Yavatmal and another. _______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. ______________________________________________________________________________ CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & P.D. KODE, JJ. DATED : 23.06.2011. Heard Shri P.S. Patil, learned Counsel for petitioner, Shri V.V. Naik, learned Counsel for respondent no.1 and Shri Jaiswal, learned A.G.P. for respondent no.2. Petitioner was selected after interview in Scheduled Caste (Sports) category. The select list discloses that he is the only candidate in that category. However, he was not permitted to join and later on after filing of the reply before this 2 Court by respondent, he learnt that the reason given was that he has not secured 45% marks in written examination. The requirement to secure 45% marks is as per the government resolution dated 27.06.2008 on which the respondent no.1 has placed reliance. According to Shri Patil, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner, that resolution is not applicable in the present circumstances and the petitioner has obtained 45% marks of the total marks prescribed for selection process. According to him, therefore, there is no separate requirement of obtaining minimum 45% marks in written test. Shri Naik, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.1 has placed reliance upon the said government resolution dated 27.06.2008 and he states that case of petitioner was placed before the Committee again in the light thereof and when it was found that the petitioner has secured only 80 marks out of 180 in written 3 examination, he was found not eligible for giving appointment. It is not in dispute that total marks to be allotted are out of 200 and out of it 180 are prescribed for written test and 20 for oral interview. The government resolution dated 27.06.2008 prescribes in its clause 5 that only those candidates who obtain minimum 45% marks in written examination are eligible for Trade Test. Here the respondent has not pointed out that the petitioner was expected to appear for any Trade test. On the contrary after written test, he was subjected to oral interview. The later part of clause 5 specifically states that for inclusion in merit list, candidate must have secured 45% of the total marks. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has secured 11.50 marks in the oral interview and his total marks therefore are 91.50 out of 200 and therefore, he satisfies this condition. As we find denial by the respondent no.1 to appoint the petitioner unjustified, we direct 4 the respondents to consider the placement of petitioner in that merit list and to issue him appointment order appropriately and in accordance with law. Shri Naik, learned Counsel for respondent no.1 has contended that the validity period of the select list had already expired. However, this contention cannot be accepted as it would amount to permitting the respondent to take advantage of their own wrong. In view of the above, Writ Petition is partly allowed. No costs. JUDGE JUDGE Rgd