vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1916 OF 2006 WRIT PETITION NO.1916 OF 2006 WRIT PETITION NO.1916 OF 2006 Dr.Appaji Tukaram Kumbhar ... Petitioner V/s. Union of India & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.Subhash Jha i/b M/s.Ashoka Law Firm for Petitioner CORAM: R.M. LODHA & R.M. LODHA & R.M. LODHA & SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. MHATRE, JJ. MHATRE, JJ. DATED: JANUARY 15, 2007 JANUARY 15, 2007 JANUARY 15, 2007 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Heard Mr.Subhash Jha, the Counsel for the Petitioner. 2. The Central Administrative Tribunal has assigned three reasons for not accepting the prayer made by the Petitioner for recording evidence of the witnesses mentioned therein. 3. The Tribunal found that examination of witnesses was neither relevant nor necessary for adjudication of the matter controversy; the witnesses mentioned in Miscellaneous Petition had no direct role in the selection process and that expert witnesses are only examined to prove the reports while there is no report of any expert relied upon by other parties. : 2 : 4. The consideration of the matter by the Central Administrative Tribunal cannot be said to suffer from any legal infirmity. 5. No case for invocation of extraordinary jurisdiction is made out. 6. Writ Petition is dismissed. 7. Oral prayer for stay is rejected. (R.M. Lodha, J.) (Nishita Mhatre, J.)