1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Writ Petition No. 3868 of 2008. ]Ranjana Balkisan Chavan Vs State of Mah & others] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri V. B. Gavali, Advocate for petitioner. Shri N. S. Khubalkar, AGP for State. Coram : B.H. Marlapalle and A.H. Joshi, JJ. Dated : 17th NOVEMBER, 2008. Heard Mr. Gawali, the Learned Counsel for the petitioner, who has not been selected for the post of Anganwadi Sevika as well as Madatnis. She has submitted the application for both posts on 28-3-2007 and underwent the selection process along with the respondents no.5 & 6 who have been selected and appointed and hence, this petition. It was first submitted that the documents of petitioner were not in order and there was no proper verification of those documents and secondly the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the marks given by the Panel Members in respect of the petitioner's 2 interview are not just and reasonable. It was submitted that the respondent no.5 & 6 have been shown undue favours. So far as the documents are concerned, our attention is invited to the certificate issued by the Principal of Dr. H. N. Sinha Arts and Commerce College, Patur, Distt. Akola and the certificate issued by the Maharashtra State Board of Secondary & Higher Seconeary Education Pune, in respect of the respondent no.5. In the first document, the father's name has been shown as Kisan, whereas in the second document, the father's name has been shown as Kashiram. The respondent no.5 left the College on 30-8-98, and her father's name was shown as Kisan. The same name appears in the caste certificate issued by the Sub Divisional Magistrate on 16-7-96. In October, 1995, Respondent no.5 appeard for the SSC Examination and her father's name is shown as Kashiram. The same name appears in the certificate issued by the Board on 16-4- 1995. This mistake in the father's name by itself cannot be 3 a reason to believe that the petitioner had submitted false documents and there was no proper verification made by the Selection committee. Petition has no merit and hence, is rejected. JUDGE JUDGE //Muley//.