Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1658 (BOM)

Ram v. Corporation of the City of Nagpur

2012-09-03

A.P.BHANGALE, B.P.DHARMADHIKARI

body2012
Judgment : (B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.) Heard Shri. A. M. Ghare with Shri. Gadhia, leaned Advocate for petitioner and Shri. S. M. Puranik, learned Advocate for respondent No. 1. Nobody appears for respondent No. 2. 2. Effort of petitioner is to demonstrate that for promotion to the post of Assistant Education Officer, as per 50 points roster, first 19 points have been exhausted and against point No. 20, earmarked for open category, candidate from Scheduled Caste has been promoted. It is pointed out that initially when petition was filed, this promotion order was not issued and petition has been allowed to be amended to incorporate challenge to that order. Respondent No. 2 is the person, who has been promoted as Scheduled Caste candidate. 3. In reply, respondent No. 1 has pointed out that in said roster, total 24 points were already exhausted and point No. 25 was open for promotion. That point was meant for Scheduled Caste category and accordingly, respondent No. 2 has been promoted against that point. 4. The entitlement of respondent No. 2 to promotion is not in dispute. Thus, dispute is about the point against which that promotion has been made. The affidavit filed by respondent No. 1 clearly shows that it was point No. 25, meant for reserved category candidate i.e. Scheduled Caste candidate. Even Resolution No. 187 by which, said promotion has been effected, shows that earlier 24 points were already exhausted and point No. 25 was available for consideration. Resolution, after expressly recording these facts, promotes respondent No. 2 as candidate belonging to Scheduled Caste. 5. In this situation, as we find that petitioner at the most can be said to be raising a disputed question of facts, has failed to demonstrate any case warranting interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction. Point no. 26 and point no. 27, which have become available after impugned promotion of respondent No. 2, are to be filled in from open category candidates. In this situation, without observing anything more, we dismiss petition. Rule discharged. No costs.