1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR W.P.No.6067 of 2007 (Nilkamal Vasant Saraf .vs. State & Ors.) =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions : Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Mr.R.L.Khapre, Adv. for the Petitioner. Mrs.Dangre, AGP for the Respondents 1 & 2. CORAM : D.D.Sinha and Mrs.Vasanti A. Naik, JJ. DATE : February 08, 2008. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. Counsel for the petitioner states that, in the instant petition, the petitioner as well as the respondent no.6 were declared surplus teachers in the school at Hinganghat; however, at a latter point of time, though the petitioner was senior, the respondent no.6 was absorbed in the school which is located not in Hinghanghat but in some other village and the respondent no.6, who was junior to the petitioner, was absorbed in some other school run by the same Management at Hinganghat. The Assistant Government Pleader, after seeking instructions from the competent Authority, makes a statement that there is no rule which imposes obligation on the 2 Education Department to retain the senior teacher who is declared surplus along with the Junior teacher in the same town nor priority is required to be given to him in the process of absorption as against the junior surplus teacher. In the backdrop of above referred facts, the grievance made by the petitioner is unfounded. The petition suffers from lack of merits. Hence, the same is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE ssj