SUNIL B.SHUKRE, ROHIT B.DEO
Shantabai Laxman Doiphode – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sunil B. Shukre, J. - Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3. In the year 2015, various posts were available on the establishment of the respondent No.2 at different locations such as Mumbai, Pune, Nagpur, Aurangabad, Wai and Kolhapur and, therefore, recruitment drive came to be initiated. An advertisement was published inviting applications online from eligible candidates for being considered for their appointments to the posts advertised. The petitioner was interested in the post of Assistant Binder. There were in all 10 posts of Assistant Binder available at Nagpur Government Press, out of which 03 posts were for open category, 02 posts for women, 01 post for ex-servicemen and 01 post for each of the four categories of social reservations such as S.C., S.T., N.T.(D), N.T.(B) and S.B.C.
4. The petitioner, who belongs to the social reservation category of N.T.(D), filled in her application seeking appointment to the post of Assistant Binder. In the application, petitioner mentioned her reservation category as N.T.(D). She also mentioned in her application that she was not interested in op
Anil Kumar Gupta vs. State of U. P. and Ors.
Deepa E.V. vs. Union of India and Ors.
Gaurav Pradhan and Ors., vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.
Jitendra Kumar Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Madras Institute of Development Studies and Anr., vs. K. Sivasubramaniyan and Ors.
R. K. Sabharwal vs. State of Punjab
Rajesh Kumar Dariya vs. Rajasthan Public Service Commission and Ors.
Ritesh R. Sah vs. Dr. Y. L. Yamul
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.