(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 3361 OF 1994 1. Sunil s/o. Anantrao Kadre, Age : 25 years, Occupation : Service, R/o. Murud, Taluka and District : Latur. 2. Gajendra s/o. Ramchandra Belurkar, Age : 25 years, Occupation : Service, R/o. Mahatma Phule Nagar, Narayan Potdar Wada, Ahmedpur, Taluka : Ahmedpur, District : Latur. 3. Dhanraj s/o. Manohar Yadav, Age : 24 years, Occupation : Service, R/o. Sumthana, Taluka : Renapur, District : Latur. 4. Surendra s/o. Laxman Jadhav, Age : 23 years, Occupation : Service, R/o. C/o. Primary Health Centre, Hasegaon, Taluka : Ausa, District : Latur. .. Petitioners. versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Govt. Pleader, High Court, Aurangabad. (2) 2. The Regional Subordinate Services Selection Board, Aurangabad Region, Aurangabad, through its Secretary. 3. The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Latur, District : Latur. .. Respondents. ....................... Mr. V.G. Sakolkar, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. N.B. Patil, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent no.1. None for respondent no.2. Mr. E.P. Sawant, Advocate, for respondent no.3. ........................ CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & S.V. GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE : 1ST JULY 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.R. Gavai, J.) : 1. The petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing and setting aside the communication of the Zilla Parishad, requesting the Maharashtra State Subordinate Service Selection Board, to recommend the names for appointments as Multipurpose Health Workers. (3) 2. Mr. V.G. Sakolkar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners were duly selected as Multipurpose Health Workers by the Zilla Parishad and, as such, there was no occasion for the Zilla Parishad to call for the names. 3. From the record, it can be seen that the appointments of the petitioners were purely temporary and when they entered into service, an undertaking was given by them, to the effect that their appointment was purely temporary in nature and they were aware that their services were liable to be terminated, at any time, without assigning any reasons. In any event, in view of the settled position of law, unless a person is appointed, after he is selected in a due selection process, he has no right to continue in the post. 4. In that view of the matter, no case is made out for interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ( S.V. GANGAPURWALA ) ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp3361