1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2797 OF 1994 Mohd. Zubair Ahmed S/o Mohd. Nazir Ahmed Age : 40 Yrs., Occ. Service, Assistant Teacher, Madina-Ul-Uloom High School, Nanded. .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. Madarse Madinatul Uloom Education Society, Nanded Through its Secretary. 2. The Dy. Director of Education Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad. 3. The Principal Madina-Ul-Uloom High School, Nanded. 4. Masood Akhtar S/o Akhtar-Uz-Zama Age : 43 Yrs., Occ. Service, Assistant Teacher, Madina-Ul-Uloom High School, Nanded. 2 5. The State of Maharashtra Through the Govt. Pleader, High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad. .... RESPONDENTS Mr. S.R.Barlinge, Advocate for petitioner. Mrs. A.N.Ansari, Advocate for respondent no. 1. Mr. N.B.Patil, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. CORAM : B.R.GAVAI & S.V.GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE : 30/6/2010 ORAL JUDGMENT : [ PER - B.R. GAVAI, J. ] 1. The petitioner by way of present petition seeks direction to respondent nos. 1 to 3 to appoint the petitioner on the post of Lecturer in Urdu in Junior college run by respondent no. 1 – Society. 2. It is the contention of the petitioner that both the petitioner as well as respondent no. 4 were working as Assistant Teachers in the Secondary School run by respondent no. 1. It is further the contention of the petitioner that the Junior college came to be attached to the said school and as such the post of Lecturer in Junior college in Urdu subject became available. It is the contention of the petitioner that since he has acquired additional qualification of M.A. in Urdu, he should have been promoted to the post of Junior Lecturer in Urdu. 3 3. From the record, it can be seen that though the petitioner has acquired qualification of M.A. in Urdu, prior to respondent no. 4 acquiring the said qualification, initial entry of respondent no. 4 in service is prior to that of the petitioner. It is also not in dispute that on the date on which the vacancy arose to be filled, both the petitioner as well as respondent no. 4 were duly qualified to be appointed as Junior Lecturer. The date of entry of respondent no. 4 in to service is 1/8/1977, whereas that of the petitioner is 8/8/1981. 4. In that view of the matter, we find no error in the appointment of respondent no. 4 as Junior Lecturer in Urdu subject. The petition is devoid of substance, as such dismissed. Rule is discharged. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 5. At this stage Mr. Barlinge, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that now respondent no. 4 has already retired from service and the petitioner is still in service. He, therefore, seeks direction that the petitioner should be posted as a Lecturer in the Junior College. 6. We are afraid as to whether we can give such a direction. However, we direct that the respondent - management would consider the case of the petitioner for posting him as Lecturer in Jr. College since he 4 possesses the necessary qualification and experience for the said post. [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA ] [ B.R. GAVAI ] JUDGE JUDGE knp/WP 2797.94