1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7015 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of | Coram, appearances, Court’s orders | Court’s or Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s | orders orders | ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. P.N. Sonpethkar, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.K. Tambe, AGP for Resp.Nos.1 & 2. Mr. S.T. Shelke, Advocate for Resp.No.4. CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR, AND S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 28TH JANUARY, 2010 Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner appeared for the examination for the appointment to the post of Multipurpose Health Worker in Zilla Parishad, Nandurbar. Admittedly, the petitioner has secured only 88 marks out of 200 marks. The minimum marks 2 required to be obtained as per Government Resolution dated 27-06-2008 is 45%. The petitioner does not qualify the said requirement. Hence, the petitioner has not been selected. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that no appointment has been made against the reserved post for O.B.C. That cannot be the basis to relax the minimum marks provided under the Government Resolution dated 27-06-2008. To get over this position, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the advertisement published by the Department, did not specifically mention the fact that minimum marks should be 45%. The candidate should obtain minimum 45% marks. That may be so. However, it is not the petitioner's case that some one with lesser marks than the petitioner, has been appointed against the reserved post. Moreover, the Department would be bound by the 3 Government Resolution dated 27-06-2008. The validity of that Government Resolution has not been questioned before us. 4. It is noticed from the record that 15 seats of reserved category could not be filled because of the criteria uniformly applied by the Selection Committee, which has been noted in the report dated 15-07-2009. Accordingly, this petition is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed. 5. Needless to observe that if the minimum marks restriction of 45% were to be relaxed, because of which the petitioner would qualify having secured 44% marks, in that event, it would be open to the Authority to consider the claim of the petitioner alongwith other eligible candidates on merits. It is clarified that this order should not be construed to mean that a direction is 4 issued to the Government to relax the minimum percentage of the marks provided under the Government Resolution, which is already in force. ( S.S. SHINDE, J. ) (A.M. KHANWILKAR,J.) sut/JAN10/wp7015.09