Judgment 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. 4. It would be unfair to the learned counsel for the petitioner, if we do not take into consideration another submission advanced by him on the basis of following pleadings :- "the Principals/headmasters/ddos shall scrutinize all the application forms. In case the principal/headmaster/ddo receives the application forms in excess of the sanctioned posts in the academic session of that year, the preference shall be given to those candidates having higher educational qualification. While making appointment I Guest faculty, first preference shall be given to those candidates belonging to the same village/kasba. A merit list of such candidates shall be prepared. In case, the candidate belonging to the same village/kasba is not available, the merit list of the candidates belonging to same block shall be prepared. The second preference should be given to the candidates belonging to same block. A merit list of such candidates shall be prepared. In case, the candidate belonging to the same village/kasba is not available, the merit list of the candidates belonging to same block shall be prepared. The second preference should be given to the candidates belonging to same block. The third preference shall be given to the candidates belonging to the same district. " 5. As a matter of fact, in order to determine the academic qualifications of respondent No.5, we have asked learned counsel for the petitioner to invite our attention to the comparative academic qualifications (i. e. the qualifications of the petitioner and respondent no.5), in response to which, learned counsel for the petitioner informed us that he had no access to the qualifications possessed by respondent No.5. Preference could be given to the petitioner only if he had higher academic qualifications vis-a-vis respondent No.5. 6. Therefore, although, if it is accepted that the petitioner and respondent No.5 belong to the same block, yet since the petitioner has not been able to establish that his qualifications are higher than those of respondent No.5, his claim for appointment in supersession of the claim of respondent No.5, is certainly not maintainable. Dismissed.