Synopsis

A candidate who had been provisionally selected for the post of social service superintendent (medical) failed to appear for document verification on the notified date. He claimed he was unwell and could not access his email. The authorities had already given two opportunities and one final extension. The candidate filed a writ petition seeking one more opportunity. The bombay high court dismissed the petition, holding that (i) the petitioner had not produced any medical certificate or cogent evidence to support his claim of illness; (ii) his pleadings were inconsistent (illness v. not checking email); (iii) candidates in public recruitment are expected to exercise diligence; (iv) courts will not interfere merely because a candidate missed a deadline without bona fide reasons.

Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hiten S. Venegavkar (Division Bench)

Date of Judgment: 5th May 2026

Citation: Writ Petition No. 6152 of 2026 (unreported)

Core Law: Constitutional Law – Article 226 (judicial review in recruitment matters); Service Law – recruitment process, document verification, timely compliance.

1. Heading of the judgment

High court of judicature at bombay civil appellate jurisdiction

Writ petition no. 6152 of 2026

Mayur sakharam sawant (petitioner) vs. State of maharashtra thr. the principal secretary and ors. (respondents)

Coram: hon’ble mr. justice ravindra v. ghuge and hon’ble mr. justice hiten s. venegavkar

Date: 5th may, 2026

2. Legal framework

Major laws and provisions involved:

• Constitution of india, 1950 – article 226 (writ jurisdiction)

• Service jurisprudence – recruitment process, adherence to notified timelines

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.