hvn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELALTE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10021 OF 2009 Ajay Ramchandra Sambre ... Petitioner Versus The Principal, K.N. Taware Vidyalaya & Ors. .... Respondents Mr. Mandar Limaye for Petitioner. Mr. V.S. Masurkar, G.P. For R. Nos. 3 and 4. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & J.H. BHATIA, JJ. DATED : DECEMBER 07, 2009 P.C. Notice waived on behalf of Respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 6. For the order to be passed, notice on other respondents dispensed with. The case of the Petitioner is that the Petitioner was appointed in the year 2001 in unaided section. Respondent No. 5 was appointed in the year 2005 also in unaided section as Shikshan Sevak. The vacancy arose in the year 2009 and Respondent No. 5 has been appointed against the said vacancy. The grievance of the Petitioner is that this appointment by bypassing the Petitioner is contrary to section 5 of the M.E.P.S. Act and Rule 9 of the Rules framed thereunder. Petitioner has another grievance namely that in so far as salary is concerned, he has not been paid entire salary though he has been appointed for teaching in the school and he continued teaching in the school. In our opinion, it is not possible for us to go into that controversy at this stage. Petitioner to make composite representation to Respondent No. 3 within two weeks from today. On such representation being made, respondent No. 3 after hearing the Petitioner, Respondent No. 1 as also Respondent to 5 to pass appropriate orders considering that the school is a recognized aided school. The entire exercise to be completed within three months from the receipt of the Petitioner’s application. With the above observations, Petition disposed of. (J.H. BHATIA, J.) (F,I. REBELLO,J.)