JUDGMENT - V.G. PALSHIKAR, J.:---When this petition came up for final hearing, Shri C.J. Madkholkar, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, made a preliminary submission that anomalous position was occurred because of restrictive interpretation of the provisions of Chapter XVII, Rule 18 of the Bombay High Court (Appellate Side) Rules, 1960.

2. By this petition, the petitioner is challenging the action of the respondents of reverting the petitioner as a sequel to an order made by the Caste Verification Authority holding that the petitioner does not belong to a particular backward community. The post held by the petitioner as a promotional post having been reserved for that backward community, the petitioner should not be continued in that post and hence he was reverted after the decision of the Government that his caste was not that for which the post is reserved. The learned Counsel has not gone into the merits of the case but has canvassed that by judgment of this Court delivered by learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No. 3826/2000, some observations have been made in relation to the Chapter XVII, Rule 18 of the Bombay High Court (Appellate

Click Here to Read the rest of this document