SUVARNA BHIMAJI THIGLE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Bhagat, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Salunkhe, learned AGP appearing for the respondent- State.

(2.) The challenge in this petition is to an order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal ( 'the Tribunal ', for short), dismissing the original application filed by the petitioner. The matter pertains to the appointment of the petitioner in Group C (Class III) cadre under the Project Affected Persons category ( 'PAP ', for short). Before the Tribunal, the petitioner had sought a direction to the respondents to appoint her in a Group C (Class III) cadre under the PAP category by giving priority to her whenever a job opportunity is available in the government department. It was the case of the petitioner that the PAPs should have been regarded as a separate and distinct category for the purpose of selection process.

(3.) It is submitted that an error has been committed by the respondents in equating the petitioner, a PAP candidate, with all those who were competing under the open category. Our attention is invited by learned counsel for the petitioner to the Government Resolution ( 'GR ', for short) dtd. 27/10/2009 which provides reservation of 5% for PAPs.