THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 22584 OF 2006 O R D E R: The petitioner is working as Lecturer in Chemistry and Bio-Chemistry, in Mrs. A.V.N. College, Visakhapatnam, the 5th respondent herein. On account of the retirement of the regular Principal, in-charge arrangement was made. In a provisional seniority list prepared by the Institution, the petitioner figured at Sl.No.2. However, the 5th respondent has chosen to appoint the 3rd respondent, as in-charge Principal, and the 4th respondent as in- charge Vice-Principal. This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus, to declare the action of respondent No.5, in not empanelling the petitioner for promotion to the post of Principal. This court passed interim order, and later on, it was modified directing the 2nd respondent to finalize the seniority list of lecturers in the 5th respondent Institution. A seniority list has since been issued, vide proceedings dated 27.2.2008, by the 2nd respondent. The petitioner contends that though he is senior most in the institution, he was denied his proper place as well as promotion. Respondent No.5 filed counter affidavit, denying the allegations of the petitioner. It is stated that there are several lecturers, who are senior to the petitioner, and his claim is without any basis. Heard the petitioner, who appeared as party-in-person, learned Government Pleader for Higher Education, Sri D.V. Seetharam Murthy, learned counsel for respondent No.5, and Sri P. Venu Gopal, learned counsel for respondent No.6. The limited grievance of the petitioner, as reflected in the prayer in the writ petition, is that his name be empanelled for promotion to the post of Principal of the Institution. As on the date of filing of the writ petition, only a provisional seniority list was in existence. The petitioner figured at Sl.No.2 in that list and naturally he felt aggrieved. To resolve the controversy once for all, this court directed respondents 2 and 5, to finalise the seniority list, duly considering the objections of the affected persons. Elaborate proceedings dated 27.2.2008 are issued by the 2nd respondent, declaring the final seniority of as many as 63 lecturers working in the college. The petitioner figured at Sl.No.5 and the 6th respondent at Sl.No.1. The 3rd respondent is said to have since retired from service. The 4th respondent figured at Sl.No.6. It is stated that pending regular appointment of the Principal, the 6th respondent is functioning as in-charge Principal. Though the petitioner contends that the final seniority list is defective in many respects, this court is not inclined to deal with the same, in this writ petition. If the petitioner feels aggrieved by the final seniority list, dated 27.2.2008, he has to work out his remedies, before the competent forum. Therefore, the writ petition is closed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ 24th June 2008 Note: Issue C.C. in three days. (B/o) PAN