1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2566/2008 (Radheshyam Ganpat Panchbudhe vs. Municipal Council, Tirora and others) CORAM : B.P.Dhamadhikari, J. DATE : 5 th DECEMBER, 2008 Heard Advocate Mardikar, for the petitioner, Advocate Dhatrak for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 , learned Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent No. 3 and Advocate Pendsey for Respondent No. 4. After hearing Advocate Mardikar for the petitioner, it is clear that the Division Bench of this Court in earlier round of litigation i.e. in Writ Petition No. 790/90 gave seniority from 30th September, 1989 to the petitioner & respondent No. 4 before it, which was the date of last appointment. It appears that thereafter the dispute in relation to inter se seniority between those petitioners cropped up and as petitioner no. 1 Arunkumar therein is more in age, the Education Authorities have treated him as senior to present petitioner. The present petitioner contends that as he had joined the service before Arunkumar, he ought to have been treated as senior. The authorities have found that in view of Division Bench 2 direction in Writ Petition No. 790/1990, seniority need to be counted from 30th September, 1989. In the circumstances, it is apparent that the approach of authorities is neither erroneous nor perverse. If present petitioner has any grievance against the date specified by the Division Bench in its judgment dated 9th April, 1992, he can take appropriate measures in that connection and the present writ petition cannot be a solution for it. I, therefore, do not find any case made out by the petitioner for interfering in writ jurisdiction. The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of, with no order as to costs. JUDGE Rvjalit