1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4774 OF 2001 Patil Motilal Suklal ...Petitioner VERSUS The Lokmanya Tilak Vidyalaya, Nandurbar, through its Head Master and others. ...Respondents ..... Shri Lalit Mahajan, advocate holding for Shri P.D.Bachate, advocate for the petitioner Shri A.B.Girase, advocate holding for Shri R.B.Raghuwanshi, advocate for respondent nos. 1 and 2 Shri S.K.Kadam, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 3 and 4. ..... CORAM : S.B.DESHMUKH AND SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, JJ. DATED : 6 th October, 2010 PER COURT : 1 We heard Shri Lalit Mahajan, advocate holding for Shri P.D.Bachate, advocate for the petitioner, Shri A.B.Girase, advocate holding for Shri R.B.Raghuwanshi, advocate for respondent nos. 1 2 and 2 and Shri S.K.Kadam, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 3 and 4. 2 The petitioner seeks following reliefs :- “ (A) This writ petition may kindly be allowed. (B) By writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the like nature the respondents 1 and 2 may kindly be directed to reinstate the services of petitioner as an Assistant teacher (Shikshan Sevak) in Lokmanya Tilak Vidyalaya, Nandurbar. (C) By writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the like nature the respondent nos. 1 and 2 may kindly be directed to pay the due salary from 12.6.2000 to 11.6.2001 to the petitioner. (D) By appropriate writ, order of direction in the like nature the respondent may kindly be restrained from filling the vacancy of “Shikshan Sevak” in their school as per advertisement dated 18.10.2001. (E) Pending the hearing and final disposal of this writ petition the prayer clauses B, C, D may please be granted in favour of the petitioner. (F) Ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (E) may please be granted in favour of the petitioner in the interest of justice and facts and circumstances of 3 the case. (G) Any other just and equitable order be passed in favour of the petitioner to which he is found entitled in the interest of justice and facts and circumstances of the case. “ 3 It appears that prayer clauses ‘A’ to ‘D’ are main prayers. This petition was filed by the petitioner on November 6, 2001. Initially notice before admission was issued by this court. Thereafter Rule has been issued by this court on 18.7.2002. 4 In response to this petition, affidavit in reply is filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2. It has been sworn in by one Mr. Shravan Deoram Marathe, Incharge Head Master of Lokmanya Tilak Vidyalaya. We have seen affidavit in reply filed by respondent nos. 1 and 2. In para 6 thereof, statement is made that present petitioner was appointed as part time teacher on temporary basis with respondent no.2 school by the Chairman of the School Committee and said appointment was without considering the report regarding strength of students of respondent no.2 at the time of making such appointment. We have also seen para 7 thereof, wherein statement is made that the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Nandurbar has 4 issued letter dated 17.10.2001 informing respondent nos. 1 and 2 that the appointment in favour of the petitioner is not by proper procedure and is without considering the strength of available students and divisions, and such an appointment is illegal and in breach of directions issued by respondent no.4. 5 Shri S.K.Kadam, learned A.G.P. points out another affidavit in reply filed by Mr. Batesing Emtha Vasave, Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Nandurbar. In para 2 thereof, statement is made that present petition is misconceived and according to affiant, petitioner does not possess any right for continuation in service and appointment of the petitioner as Assistant Teacher with the school is totally illegal and without procedure. 6 Counsel for the petitioner submits that his appointment was legal and proper. 7 It is not possible to subscribe the submission advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner. In our opinion, in view of affidavits on record, which we have referred to in foregoing paragraphs, the petition is devoid of substance. It is not possible to grant the prayer 5 for reinstatement in favour of the petitioner. Writ Petition stands dismissed. Rule discharged. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated. No costs. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) (S.B.DESHMUKH, J.) dbm/wp4774.01