Bhimrao Shamraoji Surve vs Union Of India Thr. Secretary, ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 7899 Bom

                                                                             wp.5551.17
                                            1


                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                              BENCH AT NAGPUR, NAGPUR.
                                         ...

                               WRIT PETITION NO. 5551/2017

        Bhimrao Shamraoji Surve
        Aged : 27 years, occu: NIL
        Tal.Karanja (Lad)
        Dist.Washim.                            ..        PETITIONER


                versus

1)      Union of India
        Through its Secretary
        Ministry of Home Affairs
        New Delhi.

2)      Director General
        Central Industrial Security Force
        Headquarters New Delhi
        Off: Block No.13, CGO Complex
        Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110003

3)      Deputy Inspector General,
        CISF West Zone, Off: CISF Complex,
        Sector 35, Khargar Navi Mumbai
        Maharashtra 410210.

4)      DME Board
        CT/DVR-16, CISF NISA
        Off: NISA Campus NISA Hakumpet
        Dist.Ranga Reddy
        Hyderabad, Telangana State
        through its Chairman.

5)      RME Board
        CISF (Central Industrial Security Force)
        RTC Bhilai, Durg
        Chattisgarh Through its Chairman.                    ..    RESPONDENTS




     ::: Uploaded on - 07/10/2017                       ::: Downloaded on - 08/10/2017 01:54:26 :::
                                                                                                                             wp.5551.17
                                                                       2


...............................................................................................................................................
            Mr. P.S. Khubalkar, Advocate for the petitioner
            Mr. Aurangabadkar, Advocate for respondent no.1
................................................................................................................................................

                                                                           CORAM: B.P. DHARAMDHIKARI &
                                                                                  MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

DATED: 6th October, 2017

ORAL JUDGMENT: (PER B.P.DHARMADHUIKARI, J.)

1. Rule. Rule, made returnable forthwith. Heard finally.

2. Adv. Aurangabadkar, is seeking time as he has still not received full

instructions. He submits that though reply has been filed, certain queries are still not

replied. He, therefore, seeks adjournment to enable him to file additional affidavit. Adv.

Khublakar is strongly opposing any adjournment . He relies upon the order dated 11 th

August,2017 delivered at Bombay in Writ petition No.9061/2017. He submits that

mere presence of tatoo marks cannot operate as disqualification for the post of Police

Constable.

3. It appears that on 11th August, 2017, at Bombay such a view is already

taken. There, the Court has found that rules do not specifically disqualify such a

person. In paragraph 7 the fact that under medical supervision 60% of tatoo marks of

the petitioner-Sangharsh were removed is also taken note of.

4. Here, documents produced by petitioner show that about 90% of the

marks already removed.

5. In this situation, we do not find it necessary to adjourn the matter.

wp.5551.17

6. We make the rule absolute in terms of prayer clauses (1) & (2).

7. The respondents shall issue orders to petitioner to enable him to

undergo necessary training, at the earliest.

8. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms, with no order as to

costs.

                          JUDGE                              JUDGE

sahare