IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. WRIT PETITION No.6213 OF 2005. Smt. Suvarna Tukaram Patil. Petitioner. Vs. Women’s Education Society & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr. A. J. Chougule, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. R. S. Apte, Advocate i/b Advocate M. S. Lagu for the Respondent No.1. Ms. V. S. Mhaispurkar, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 3 and 5. CORAM:R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR,J. CORAM:R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR,J. CORAM:R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR,J. DATED:14th DATED:14th DATED:14th DECEMBER, 2006. DECEMBER, 2006. DECEMBER, 2006. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- 1. The petitioner challenges the judgment and order dated 27th September, 2004 passed in the Appeal No.197 of 1998 by the School Tribunal, Kolhapur. By the impugned order appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. It is the contention of behalf of the petitioner that the appointment letter issued in favour of the petitioner nowhere discloses that the appointment was made in a post reserved for reserved category candidate. The contention has no relevancy to the matter in issue as the appointment of the petitioner [ 2 ] was undoubtedly on temporary basis for a specific period. Being so, the petitioner did not acquire any right to continue to be in employment after the expiry of the period for which she was appointed. Hence no fault can be found with the order of termination on expiry of contractual period of service. The Tribunal by the impugned order having up held such order after considering the nature of the employment with the respondent, the impugned judgment does not disclose any jurisdictional error so as to warrant interference in exercise of power under Article 227 of the Constitution. Hence no case is made out for interference in writ jurisdiction, The petition fails and is hereby rejected. [R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR,J] [R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR,J] [R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR,J]