1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO. 3564 OF 2009 (Gajanan Uddhaorao Garole .v. Ramkrishna Shikshan Prasarak Sanstha and others) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri P.B. Patil, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Anand Parchure, Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 2. Smt. B.H. Dangre, Additional GP for the respondent Nos.3 and 4. CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. 17TH JUNE, 2010. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. By this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking declaration that the impugned roster dated 09.08.2007 (Annexure- C1) is illegal with further direction to respondent No.4- Commissioner to verify the roster in accordance with Government Resolution dated 19.06.1996. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the respondent No.3. In the reply, the respondent No.3 has made reference to two writ petitions filed by the petitioner earlier being Writ Petition No. 2202 of 2003 and Writ Petition No. 2132 of 2007. It would be advantageous to refer to paragraph Nos.2 and 3 of reply-in- affidavit, which read thus :- “2. It is alleged by the petitioner that he was appointed as Instructor for M.C.V.C. in respondent No.2 college from 8.12.1999 and on 12.12.2002 termination order was issued to him on the ground that Deputy Director has refused to grant approval vide order dated 7.8.2001 to his appointment. Being aggrieved by aforesaid order the petitioner approached this Hon'ble Court by filing Writ Petition No. 2202/2003 which came to be disposed of by the Hon'ble Court by its order dated 20.6.2007 directing management to submit its roster and directed continuation of the petitioner till verification of 2 roster appointing ascertain. It is the contention of the petitioner that in pursuance of the said direction the roster was verified by the respondent No.4 Commissioner on 9.8.2007 but the same is in contrast to the direction issued by the Hon'ble Court in judgment dated 20.6.2007 and also Government Resolution 19.6.2005. 3. It is submitted that the petitioner Shri Gajanan Uddharao Garole has filed against the Judgment and order dated 19.11.2008 passed by the Hon'ble High Court in Writ Petition No. 2132/2007 and also in Appeal No. 1/2003, decided by the School Tribunal on 21.11.2006 whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner challenging termination dated 12.12.2002, and against other various judgments passed by the Hon'ble Courts in Writ Petition No. 3563/2009.” From perusal of the aforesaid averments in the affidavit, it appears that this Court had issued direction to verify the roster and accordingly it was verified by respondent No.4- Commissioner on 09.08.2007. It further appears that the petitioner's services were terminated in 2002 itself which was challenged by the petitioner by filing an appeal being Appeal No. 1/2003 before the School Tribunal. The School Tribunal dismissed the appeal by its judgment and order dated 21.11.2006. That judgment of the School Tribunal was challenged before this Court in Writ Petition No. 2132/2007. This Court is informed that the said writ petition also came to be dismissed. The petitioner did not carry the matter further against the dismissal of writ petition. That being so, we do not find any reason to entertain this writ petition and particularly in view of the statements made on affidavit that the roster was verified by respondent No.4- Commissioner pursuance to the direction issued by this Court in Writ Petition No. 2202/2003. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that despite specific directions issued by this Court in earlier round of litigation, it was not examined whether the roster was consistent with the Government Resolution dated 19.06.1996. In the facts 3 and circumstances of this case, we do not deem it necessary to examine in this writ petition as to whether or not the roster was consistent with the Government Resolution dated 19.06.1996. In the circumstances the petition is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE *rrg.