WP(C) 4837/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY Heard Mr. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Khatan iar, learned standing counsel, Education Department for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4. The petitioner has filed the present petition praying for the following relief: - Under the above facts circumstances, it is, therefore, prayed your lords hips may be pleased to admit this writ petition, call for the records, and calli ng upon the respondents to show cause as to why a writ of mandamus/certioraris o r any other writ like nature shall not be issued directing commanding the respon dents to allow, regularize the service of the petitioner as an Asstt. Teacher at No. 1, Kandhulimari Adarsha M.E. Madrassa and or proper direction to the respon dent No. 3, for regularize the petitioner in the same post in place of the respo ndent No. 6, in the same school and after cause or causes shown if any and upon hearing of the parties and on perusal of records make the rule absolute for the interest of justice and/or pass any further appropriate order/direction as your lordships may deem fit and proper. The petitioner claims to be appointed as assistant teacher in No. 1 Kand hulimari Adarsha M.E. Madrassa school, by the managing committee vide order date d 6.7.2010 issued by the president of the said managing committee which is avail able at Annexure-C to the writ petition. According to the petitioner pursuant to such appointment she joined her service and though discharging her duties for almost two months her service has not been regularized by the managing committee of the school. It is not in dispute that the school is a private school and neither has been brought under the deficit system of grants in aid nor has been provinciali sed. The school being a private school and the appointment of the petitioner bei ng made by the managing committee of the school no writ of madamus can be issued to the managing committee of such private school. That apart, from the order of appointment dated 6.7.2010 it appears that the petitioner was appointed as assi stant teacher on no pay basis i.e. on honorary basis. The petitioner claims to b e in service for almost two months and on that basis the claims for regularizati on of service. The petitioner’s appointment was not preceded by any selection an d as such there is no question of regularization in service. In view of the above, I do not find any merit and the writ petition acco rdingly stands dismissed. No cost.