1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7237 OF 2010 ( Rupali Hingmire Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr. A.B. Karande, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.K. Kadam, AGP for respondent No. 1. Mr. A.R. Nikam, Advocate for respondent No. 4. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI AND A.A.SAYED, JJ. DATED : 28th September, 2010. PER COURT : 1. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the action of the respondents in not considering the claim of the petitioner against the seat reserved for sport category cannot be faulted with, since the petitioner had not produced the necessary documents, the respondents would be duty bound to consider the claim of the petitioner against the seat reserved for sports category of OBC - Women Reservation. 2. Shri. Nikam, learned counsel for respondent No. 4, makes a categorical statement that the petitioner has secured 96 marks whereas the last candidate selected from OBC female category has secured 104 marks and as such, even if 2 the claim of the petitioner is considered as she belongs from OBC female category, she is not entitled for the relief claimed. 3. In that view of the matter, no interference is warranted and the petition is rejected. [ A. A. SAYED ] [ B. R. GAVAI ] Judge Judge ssc/wp7237.10