1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ petition No. 3510/2007 (Mohd. Ansar Abdul Rahim & others VERSUS Zilla Parishad, Akola & another ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. S.P. Palshikar, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. G.G. Mishra, counsel for the R-1 & 2. CORAM : D.D.SINHA AND SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 15, 2008. Heard. The counsel for the petitioner states that in the instant petition, the petitioner is seeking direction to the respondent Zilla Parishad, Akola to consider the appointment of the petitioner which is made on the post of Shikshan Sevak from the open category in view of the Government Circular dated 07.12.2001 issued by the State. The counsel for the petitioner states that on the earlier occasion, similar issue was involved in Writ Petition No. 5172/2006, wherein, Zilla Parishad, Akola has filed an affidavit-in-reply on behalf of Zilla Parishad and in paragraph 2 of the same it is mentioned thus----- “It is respectfully submitted 2 that the claim of the petitioners regarding consideration of their appointment on the post of Shikshan Sevak from open category, would be considered in the light of Govt. Circular dated 7.12.2001 as well as in accordance with law and procedure applicable in this regard.” The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the said stand taken by the Zilla Parishad, this Court disposed of the writ petition vide order dated 21.11.2006, which reads thus---- “Heard Shri Palshikar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Gaikee, learned counsel for the respondents. In view of statement made by respondent nos.1 and 2 in para (2) of the affidavit dated 16.11.2006, grievance of the petitioners does not survive. The petition is disposed of accordingly. However, we expect the respondents to take a decision at the earliest.” It is, therefore, prayed that the present 3 writ petition may also be disposed of accordingly. The counsel for the Zilla Parishad does not dispute the factual aspect of the matter and has submitted that the claim of the petitioners in respect of their appointment on the post of Shikshan Sevak, shall be considered from the open category in view of the Government Circular dated 07.12.2001. In the backdrop of the above referred facts, nothing survives in the present writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE APTE