-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 136 OF 2008 Haleem Mohd. Haneef Khan ).. Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ).. Respondents Mr S D Thokade; i/b Mr S M Suryawanshi for the Petitioner. Mr V S Masurkar, Government Pleader, with Mr P M Patil, Assistant Government Pleader, for the State. Mr A S Rao for Respondent Nos.2, 4 and 5. Mr S M Kamble for Respondent Nos.6 and 7. CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & S. A. BOBDE, J. DATED : 4TH DECEMBER 2008 P.C. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner. The Petitioner in the present Public Interest Litigation prays that the appointment of Respondent Nos. 3, 5 and 7 as Municipal Commissioners of Bhiwandi Nizampur, Kalyan-Dombivali and Jalgaon Municipal Corporations respectively be set aside as the Respondents have acted arbitrarily and have superseded seniors who are more efficient persons. 2. In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of -2- Dr. B Singh vs Union of India and others, (2004) 3 SCC 363, we are unable to accept the contention that this question can be raised in a Public Interest Litigation. The matter strictly falls within the ambit of service jurisprudence and if the seniors are aggrieved, they can approach the Court as it will be a cause of action personally to those officers. To justify the filing of the present Public Interest Litigation, the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner has referred to paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Petition. Bare reading of these paragraphs show that the Petitioner wants us to draw a comparative merit between the Respondents and the officers' name stated in those paragraphs and then come to the conclusion that they have been overlooked arbitrarily and discriminately. We are of the considered view, that the present Public Interest Litigation is not maintainable. Dismissed. No order as to costs. CHIEF JUSTICE S. A. BOBDE, J.