HEGDE APPA DHONDIBA Vs. SOMESHWAR SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent No. 1 promoted the respondent No. 3 to the higher grade as library attendant since June, 1990. According to the petitioner, he should have been given said higher grade of library attendant and not the respondent No. 3. Hence, he is praying by this petition under Article 226 that he be given higher grade of library attendant from June, 1990 and giving of higher grade or promotion to respondent No. 3 be quashed.

(2.) THE entire claim of the petitioner is based upon the allegation that the petitioner alongwith four others i. e. Vasant Gosavi, B. R. Gaikwad, Yadav H. S. and Jadhav B. N.-respondent No. 3 were all working as peons with respondent No. 1. Except the petitioner, all four others came to be given said higher grade or promotion of library attendant. He is not disputing giving the said promotion or higher grade to Mr. Vasant Gosavi, Mr. B. R. Gaikwad and Mr. Yadav H. S. as they were senior to him. But according to the petitioner, Mr. B. N. Jadhav was junior to him in service and hence, instead of respondent No. 3 he should have been promoted. However, the learned Counsel for the petitioner is not able to point out any rule or Government Resolution to the effect that the post of library attendant is to be given only on the basis of seniority. Therefore, we find no merit in the claim made in the petition.

(3.) IT is pointed out on behalf of the respondent No. 1 that if the petitioner is having any grievance of supersession then under section 9 (1) (b) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977, the petitioner can approach the School Tribunal by filing an appeal. The petitioner can approach School Tribunal if there is any case of supersession involved.