1 aswp-8316 to 8318 & 8320-11 pdp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8316 OF 2011 Shri Ramesh Dadaso Shirke .. Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. .. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 8317 OF 2011 Shri Santosh Jayaram Jadhav .. Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. .. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 8318 OF 2011 Shri Suresh Bapusaheb Patil .. Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. .. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 8320 OF 2011 Shri Jitendra Rajaram Bhoi .. Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. .. Respondents Mr. V.S. Deokar for petitioners. Mr. P. P. Kakade, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2. Mr. Milind Deshmukh for respondent nos.3 and 4. 2 aswp-8316 to 8318 & 8320-11 CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. NOVEMBER 15, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard Mr. Deokar, the learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. In all these petitions a common grievance is raised that the petitioners who came to be appointed initially to the post of Peon have not been considered for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher or Shikshan Sevak after they have improved their qualifications. Neither the scheme of the M.E.P.S. Act nor the Rules framed thereunder provide for any right of being considered for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher from amongst the Peons or Clerks on acquiring the qualifications prescribed for the post of Assistant Teacher, while in service. 3. The Government Resolution dated 15/4/1991 has already been quashed by the Full Bench of this court in the case of Tanaji Madhukar Barbade vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. [2010 (6) Mh.L.J. 901]. It is, therefore, clear that there is no vested right created in favour of any of the petitioners for being appointed for the post of Assistant Teacher / Shikshan Sevak and, therefore, these petitions must fail at the threshold. 4. Hence, the petitions are hereby rejected summarily. 3 aswp-8316 to 8318 & 8320-11 5. However, if the respondent-management has invited applications for the post of Assistant Teacher and the petitioners, if they are otherwise eligible for the said post of Assistant Teacher, may be considered along with other applicants and their applications will not be rejected solely on the ground that they are the employees of the management as of now. Undoubtedly, the GR dated 10/6/2005 will be applicable to any of the petitioners who is found fit for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher / Shikshan Sevak. (SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)