1 Spb/- IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL SIDE JURISDICTION APPEAL NO. 875 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3142 OF 2002 Mrs. Nalini V. Karnand .. Appellant. V/s. The Principal of K.J. Somaiya College of Arts & Commerce & Anr. .. Respondents. --- Mr. Mihir Desai with Ms. Usharani Peri for the Appellant. Mr. K.S.Bapat for Respondent NO.1. Mr.Rui Rodriques for Respondent No.2. --- CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH AND SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA,JJ. DATED: 17th JUNE, 2010 P.C.: 1. By this Appeal, the appellant challenges the order passed by the learned single Judge of this court in writ petition no. 3142 /2006 dated 13th April, 2006. That petition was filed by the respondent, challenging the order passed by the 2 College Tribunal. 2. The relevant facts are that the appellant was in the service of the respondent as full time lecturer but due to reduction of work load, by order dated 01.08.1997 the appellant was appointed as part time lecturer. That order was challenged before the College Tribunal by filing an appeal under section 59 of the Maharashtra Universities Act. One of the objections raised on behalf of the Management was that the appeal is not maintainable because under section 59, an appeal lies before the College Tribunal against an order of dismissal, removal or termination or reduction in rank. The case of the appellant was that by the order dated 01.08.1997 he has been reduced in rank. That case was accepted by the College Tribunal. The learned single Judge, however, held that the College Tribunal was not justified in holding the appointment of the appellant as part time lecturer amounts to reduction in rank. The learned single Judge held that the conversion of the full time lecturer s post in a part 3 time lecturer s post does not amount to reduction in rank as the holders of the post continues to be in the same rank, namely, lecturer. It is this order of the learned single Judge which is challenged in the appeal. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for both the sides and perused the order of the learned single Judge. The learned single Judge mainly relies on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of High Court, Calcutta vs. Amal Kumar Roy (AIR 1962 SC 1704), where the Supreme Court has construed the term reduction in rank to mean reduction of a person from one cadre to lower cadre. The Supreme Court has held that expression rank has a reference to a person s classification and not his particular place in the same cadre in the hierarchy of the service to which he belongs. Insofar as the present case is concerned the appellant was working as lecturer. He continued to be a lecturer even after the order, appointing him as lecturer was passed. Therefore, there is no question of his reduction in the rank. 4 We do not find that any error is committed by the learned single Judge. Therefore, there is no reason to interfere. 4. Appeal is dismissed accordingly and disposed of as such. (D.K.DESHMUKH,J.) (SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA,J.) .....