(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 5282 OF 2010 1. Dhanlal s/o. Basant Bhoi, Age : 41 years, Occupation : Service, presently working as Trained Graduate Teacher in Primary School, Manegaon, Taluka : Muktainagar, District : Jalgaon. 2. Jagannath s/o. Kishan Gadilohar (Lohar), Age : 43 years, Occupation : Service, presently working as Assistant Teacher, Primary School, Parsade, Taluka : Yawal, District : Jalgaon. .. Petitioners. versus 1. Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon, through its Chief Executive Officer, Jalgaon. 2. The Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon. 3. Shri Deepak Chabulal Sonawane, Age : Major, Occupation : Service, presently working as Centre Incharge, Primary School, run by Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon, at Adawad, Taluka : Chopda, District : Jalgaon. .. Respondents. (2) ....................... Mr. S.R. Barlinge, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. M.S. Sonawane Patil, Advocate, for respondent nos.1 and 2. Mr. S.M. Kulkarni, Advocate, for respondent no.3. ........................ CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & R.M. BORDE, JJ. DATE : 29TH NOVEMBER 2010 COURT'S ORDER (Per B.R. Gavai, J.) : 1. The petitioners have filed the present petition, challenging the order of promotion issued by respondent nos.1 and 2, to respondent no.3, by superseding the claim of the petitioners. 2. An affidavit in reply is filed on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2 / Zilla Parishad. In the said affidavit, it is categorically stated that the promotion given to the respondent no.3 has been wrongly given and that the respondent no.3 has played a fraud with the Zilla Parishad, thereby showing himself from NT(C) category, whereas in fact, he is from NT(B) category. It is further stated that the Chief Executive Officer of the Zilla Parishad has already initiated a process of reversion of (3) respondent no.3. It has further been stated that the claim of the petitioners, who claim from NT(B) category, would be considered in accordance with the seniority list. 3. In that view of the matter, the petition has served its purpose and nothing is required to be adjudicated. 4. In the light of the statements made by the respondent / Zilla Parishad, in the affidavit in reply, the petition is disposed of. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on merits of the matter. ( R.M. BORDE ) ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp5282