IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5405 OF 2008 Dilip P. Bhandare and Anr. ...Petitioners. v. Subhashnagar Shri Mahadeo Mandir Trust & Ors. ...Respondents. Ms. Anjali S. Uthale i/by S.S.Kulkarni, advs. For the Petitioners. Mr.S.D.Rayarikar, AGP for the Respondent/State. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : 2nd February , 2010. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the Parties. 2 The present petitioner got himself appointed as Pujari by making an application before the Joint Charity Commissioner that another Pujari Sharad Tejamal Pandit had expired. Later on, said Sharad Pandit appeared and sought revocation of that order. In view of that, the order appointing the present petitioner was cancelled. Present petitioner sought review of the same order and review application was rejected. 3 It is clear that Sharad is alive while the present petitioner had represented that said Sharad had expired on the basis of wrong information that he was no more alive and in view of that supposed - 2 - vacancy, petitioner was appointed in place of Sharad. Later on, that information was found wrong. The petitioner contended that he had made an application on the basis of wrong information given to him and it was not made intentionally. Even though this statement of the present petitioner may be correct still the fact remains that his appointment was made on the basis of wrong information that Sharad was not alive. If the correct information would be before the Court, the Joint Charity Commissioner would not have appointed the petitioner even at the first instance. In view of these circumstances, I do not see any merit in the present petition. 4 Petition stands dismissed. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)