920-RA-57-2025.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 920 REVIEW APPLICATION (CIVIL) NO. 57 OF 2025 IN WP/10108/2024 Swapnali Sandip Patil ….Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra Through Secretary And Others …..Respondents ….. Mr. P. N. Kutti h/f Mr. Putthankulam Prasanna N, Advocate for Applicant Mr. A. A. A. Khan, AGP for the Respondents - State ….. CORAM : R. G. AVACHAT & NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ. DATE : 12.06.2025 PER COURT : 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the Applicant / Original Petitioner and perused the papers on record. 2. The Applicant had applied for the post of ‘Police Patil’ for Village – Tahakali, Taluka – Bhusawal, District – Jalgaon, pursuant to the Advertisement dated 18/07/2023 issued by the Appointing Authority. The Applicant appeared for the written examination and thereafter was called for an interview. A Complaint was made that the Applicant had three [3] children. Therefore, the Applicant was not given the appointment on the post of ‘Police Patil’. Being aggrieved, the Applicant approached the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Aurangabad [For short ‘the Tribunal’] by filing an Original Application No.853/2023 contending that, the first child was from the earlier marriage and two [2] children were 1 920-RA-57-2025.odt from the second marriage. The said Original Application was heard by the Tribunal and by the Judgment and order dated 06/08/2024, dismissed the same. Against the said dismissal, the Applicant approached this Court in the above referred Writ Petition. The said Writ Petition was heard by this Court and dismissed vide order dated 18/09/2024. The Applicant approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Special Leave to Appeal No.1797/2025, which came to be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the Applicant to take recourse to such remedies, which were available in accordance with law, including to file a Petition seeking review of the order of this Court. Therefore, the Applicant has filed the Application for review. 3. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Applicant that, the requirement of submitting the Affidavit of a small family was introduced in the Maharashtra Village Police Patils (Recruitment, Pay, Allowances and other Conditions of Service) Order, 1968, with effect from 16/08/2024, which was much later than the Advertisement. He submits that, there is nothing to show that, the said amendment in Sub-rule 3[1][f] of the aforesaid order would apply retrospectively. He submits that, there was no such requirement in the said Order of 1968 to have small family for the appointment to the post of ‘Police Patil’. He submits that, the decision in Khairunisa w/o Sheikh Chand V/s Chandrashekhar Daulatrao Chincholkar and others [Writ Petition No.2482/2023] relied upon by this Court in dismissing the Writ Petition was in the context of disqualification under the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 and not related to the appointment for the post of ‘Police Patil’. He submits that, in this view of the matter, the Application for review needs to be allowed and the Writ Petition needs to be heard afresh. Reliance is placed 2 920-RA-57-2025.odt by the learned Advocate for the Applicant on the order dated 13/09/2024, passed by the learned Single Judge, Nagpur Bench of this Court, in Writ Petition No.7814/2019, in support of the Application. Perusal of the said order, goes to show that, the matter was remanded back to the Appointing Authority for reconsideration in light of the aforesaid amendment, which was made applicable subsequent to the recruitment process. 4. We have gone through the papers on record. There is no doubt that, the amendment in the aforesaid Order of 1968 in respect of submitting the Affidavit of small family, pursuant to the provisions of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Declaration of Small Family) Rules, 2005, was introduced by 16/08/2024, which was after the recruitment to the post of ‘Police Patil’ was started. However, the Advertisement, to which, the Applicant had responded and applied for the post of ‘Police Patil’ clearly specifies that, the Affidavit for the small family was one of the condition in the recruitment process. The said Condition No.13 reads as under :- “13- lkekU; iz’kklu foHkkx vf/klwpuk dzekad ,lvkjOgh & 2000 @ iz-dza-17/2000/12 28 ekpZ 2005 o ‘kkluifji=d ,lvkjOgh & 2000 @iz-dza-17/2000/12, 01 tqyS 2005 uqlkj fofgr dsysY;kuqlkj o egkjk”Vªukxjh lsok ¼ygkudqVwackps izfrKkiu½ fu;e 2005 vUo;s ‘kklukus xV v c d M e/khy lsokizos’kklkBh izfrKk uequk ¼v½ vko’;d vgZrk Eg.kwu fofghr ueqU;krhy ygku dqVwackps ifrKki= ca/kudkjd vkgs- lnjps izfrKki= dkxni= rikl.khP;k osGh lknj dj.ks vko’;d vkgs-” 5. The terms and conditions in the Advertisement, which were never challenged, will apply in equal force in respect of the recruitment of the aforesaid post of ‘Police Patil’. The Applicant 3 920-RA-57-2025.odt had responded to the said Advertisement and also appeared for the examination. Now, it does not lie in the mouth of the Applicant that, the terms and conditions of the said Advertisement particularly Condition No.13 will not be applicable to her. The said order of Nagpur Bench nowhere shows that, the terms and conditions in the Advertisement were considered by the Court and, therefore, the said order will not be helpful to the Applicant. In this view of the matter, we do not find any case for issuance of notice in the Application for review and hence, we proceed to pass the following order : ORDER [I] The Application is rejected. [NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.] [R. G. AVACHAT, J.] Sameer/June-2025 4