pvr 1 WP2524-10 IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2524 OF 2010 Somnath Haribhau Bankar ...Petitioner vs. 1.The Pune Minicipal Commissioner & ors. ...Respondents --- Mr.Purushottam G.Chavan, for Petitioner. Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, Addl.GP for Respondent no.4. Mr.A.P.Kulkarni, for Respondent nos.1,2 & 5. Mr.Umesh Mankapure, for Respondent no.4. --- CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & N.D.DESHPANDE,JJ. DATED: 7th October, 2010 P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides. It is clear that pursuant to the advertisement, the petitioner had applied. Thereafter, the selection panel interviewed the candidates. The selected candidate Mr.Pawar pvr 2 WP2524-10 Santosh secured 31 marks whereas the petitioner secured only 18 marks. The petitioner was not selected, therefore, there was no question of petitioner being appointed. We also do not find that the respondent who has been appointed do not possess required qualification. In our opinion, once we find that the candidate who has been appointed is duly qualified, even assuming that there are some irregularities in the appointment, this Court in its extraordinary jurisdiction cannot interfere with the appointment. The petition is, therefore, rejected. (D.K.DESHMUKH,J.) (N.D.DESHPANDE,J.)