1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.121 OF 2006 Maharashtra Nav Nirman Kamgar Sena .. Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra and another .. Respondents Mr. R.K. Mendadkar for the petitioner. Ms. P.S. Cardozo, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent No.1. Mr. K.D. Sukre with Mr. Sandesh Deshpande for the respondent No.2. CORAM : R.M.LODHA & S.A.BOBDE , JJ. DATED : 4TH OCTOBER, 2006. P.C. We heard the counsel for the petitioner and perused the writ petition and the notification No. NMMC /Transport/ Admn. /I / 2006. 2. In our view, the writ petition does not deserve to be entertained in the category of Public Interest Litigation. As it is, the issue raised in the writ petition is concerning appointment to the various category of officers in group ` A', group `B' and group `C'. It is difficult to comprehend the grievance of the petitioner that until the backlog in the posts of drivers and conductors as per 2 sanctioned strength is filled up, no appointment should take place in the Navi Mumbai Transport Undertaking. 3. The writ petition (PIL) is wholly misconceived and is required to be dismissed and is dismissed accordingly. (R.M.LODHA, J.) (S.A.BOBDE, J.)