THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.17736 of 1995 Dated:14.11.2006 Between Ch.Subba rao …..Petitioner and 1.M/s.M.S.N.Charities, Jagannayakapur,Kakinada East Godavari District Rep., by its Correspondent and others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.17736 of 1995 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus to declare the selection process of appointing one B.Ed teacher and one Telugu Pandit in the 2nd respondent school, for which notification was issued in August, 1994 and written examination and interviews were held on 25.4.1995, as illegal and arbitrary. It appears that the petitioner studied Bhasha Praveena in the year 1978, completed Telugu Pandit course in the year 1981 and enrolled his name with the Employment Exchange, Kakinada 15 years back. Thereafter, 1st respondent has notified two aided vacancies of Telugu Pandit teachers, for which, the petitioner has applied. Subsequently, written examination was conducted and he was called for interview, but he was not selected. It seems that 6th and 7th respondents have been selected. Questioning their appointments, the present writ petition is filed stating that the selections were not properly conducted. 1st respondent filed counter asserting that the selections were conducted by a duly constituted selection committee including subject experts, in all four, and the same were conducted as per law. 58 candidates appeared for written test for Telugu Pandit Grade II and 38 candidates for Mathematics B.Ed., Assistant post. Thus, in all, 96 candidates appeared. 6th and 7th respondents were selected by duly constituted selection committee. The same is neither arbitrary nor illegal. The petitioner has not made out any case calling for interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. While admitting the writ petition, on 8.8.1995 an interim order was passed staying the appointments of the 6th and 7th respondents. However, on filing vacate stay petition, the interim order was vacated and 6th and 7th respondents were appointed and took over charge in their respective posts. I am of the opinion that no ground is made out for calling interference into the selection process adopted by the respondents in selecting the 6th and 7th respondents. In fact, the petitioner was also subjected to the same selection process. Having subjected himself to the selection process, it is not open for him to challenge the same stating that the selections were not properly conducted since he was not selected. Writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _________ 14-11-2006 rkk