1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR M.C.A. NO.1019/2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1665/1996 (D) [Prafulchandra s/o Ruplal Satdeve .vrs. The Municipal Commissioner, N.M.C. Nagpur and others] ................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ................................................................................................................................................................... CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI AND P.D. KODE, JJ. DATE : NOVEMBER 14, 2011. Heard Shri J.M. Shamkuwar, learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner and Shri Puranik, learned counsel for respondent no.1. On last occasion, learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner was asked to point out how there can be a grievance on merits. The matter was accordingly adjourned to today. Today, we have heard learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner on merits. As learned counsel for the applicant argues on merits, we recall order dated 14th July, 2011 and accordingly Writ Petition No.1665/1996 is restored back to file. MCA stands disposed of accordingly. Writ Petition No.1665/1996 Heard Shri J.M. Shamkuwar, learned 2 counsel for the petitioner and Shri Puranik, learned counsel for respondent no.1 It is apparent that merely because the petitioner possesses or procures appropriate qualifications, his employer cannot be directed to appoint him or promote him against the post which warrants those qualifications. It is not the case of the present petitioner that anybody else similarly placed has been either appointed or promoted and his claim has been superseded. Shri Shamkuwar, learned counsel for the petitioner states that whenever vacancy arises, the employer may be called upon to consider entitlement of the petitioner. Respondent no.1 – Employer is a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and hence while filling any vacancy, it has to take recourse to due process. If the petitioner is not considered in due process, he shall be at liberty to approach to this Court. Hence, with that liberty to the petitioner, we discharge rule. The petition is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE Gulande