ORDER
Arun Mishra, J.
1. Petitioner in this petition has prayed for the relief to direct respondent No. 1 to take interview of the petitioner for the post of Civil Judge. Petitioner was not interviewed owing to the fact that he did not possess the domicile certificate.
2. Petitioner had filed Writ Petition (S) No. 1561/2004 in which question of appointment of Civil Judge was raised. Same has been decided on 4-8-2004. Indore Bench of this Court had declined to grant any relief to the petitioner as the process of appointment of Civil Judge was already over. Following order was passed by Indore Bench of this Court:–
“5. After having heard learned Counsel for the parties at length and on going through the material available on record and reply of State Govt. this writ petition deserves to be allowed to the extent that the order dated 3-1-2003 (Annexure P-15) passed by the S.D.O., Indore and the report given by the High Level Screening Committee dated 7-11-2003 (Annexure P-17-A) are hereby quashed. The case of the petitioner for grant of domicile certificate and caste-certificate may now be considered afresh by the Competent Authority in accordance with law. So far as the recruitment to the post of Civil Judge is concerned, the whole process is over and appointment orders have been issued to selected candidates, hence nothing can be done now at this distant point of time hence, no relief can be granted in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Writ petition stands disposed. However, no order as to costs.”
3. Petitioner has raised the similar question again that he should be interviewed as earlier requisite certificate was not issued erroneously.
4. Petitioner has submitted that relaxation should have been granted to the petitioner; rigid principle should not have been applied. He has relied upon a decision of Supreme Court in Dolly Chhanda v. Chairman, JEE and Ors., , and a decision of this Court in Omprakash Gupta v. State of M.P. and Ors., 1992 MPLJ 145. Petitioner has further prayed that additional seat may be ordered to be created.
5. In my opinion, petitioner cannot re-agitate the question by way of filing writ petition particularly when no relief has been granted to the petitioner in the previous writ petition filed at Indore Bench of this Court in view of Para 5 of the order quoted above, I find that petitioner is not entitled for the relief which has been prayed for in this writ petition; entire process is over. This Court can not order creation of the seat. The decision of Dolly Chhandra v. Chairman, JEE and Ors. (supra) is of no application as this Court has already declined the relief of participation in the process of selection of Civil Judge in the previous writ petition. The decision in Omprakash v. State of M.P.’s case is of also no assistance to the petitioner. I find no merit in this petition. Same is dismissed.