J.S.Khehar, J. - (1.) The petitioner through the instant writ petition is impugning the action of respondent No.4 in appointing respondent No.5 as a Sanskrit teacher. It is pertinent to mention that respondent No.5 has been appointed as a Sanskrit teacher under the special scheme sponsored by the respondents to fill up all vacancies of teachers by a stop-gap arrangement, for the benefit of the students. It is not a matter of dispute that under the aforesaid scheme of temporary appointments, a qualified person belonging to the village, where the school is located, is to be given preference. It is, therefore, that respondent No.5 came to be appointed as Sanskrit teacher at the Government High School, Bagru Kalan in District Jind.
(2.) The solitary contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the benefit of appointment to respondent No.5, has been granted erroneously, on account of the fact that respondent No.5 factually belongs to Bagru Khurd and not Bagru Kalan. It is, however, acknowledged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Bagru Khurd and Bagru Kalan are adjoining villages.
(3.) In view of the fact that the appointment of Guest teachers under the scheme referred to above, is only a stop-gap arrangement, coupled with the fact that respondent No.5 belongs to the village adjoining the village where the school is located, we find no justification in interfering with the order of appointment of respondent No.5, particularly because the petitioner himself does not belong to the village, where the school is located.;