Judgment :- Elipe Dharma Rao, J. The writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge. 2. The recruitment for the two posts of Economics Lecturer in the appellant college was made after obtaining sanction from the appropriate authority. Out of two posts one post is reserved for backward class. After obtaining list of candidates from the Employment Exchange, conducted the selection process and appointed one A.Gurusamy and C.Rajasekar on the basis of their qualifications and experience. When the petitioner also appeared for the interview apprehending that he will not be selected, therefore filed the writ petition with the prayer. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition it is stated that he was not paid the amount of Rs.56,582.40, but no relief is sought for. However, the learned single Judge while disposing of the writ petition directed the appellant to consider the case of the petitioner in any suitable vacancy for appointment and if the salary is not paid to the petitioner, the appellant/third respondent is directed to pay the same. 3. This direction is contrary to the pleadings and prayer in the writ petition. When a selection process was conducted to fill up two vacancies of Lecturer posts in Economics Department of the appellant college and the claim made by the petitioner is that he is working from 1988 in regular intervals and non-selection of the petitioner to one of the vcancies is illegal, therefore giving a direction to consider his case for any suitable vacancy is not a proper relief granted by the learned single judge and the same is liable to be set aside and in view of the appointment of the abovesaid two persons, namely, Mr.A.Guruswamy and Mr.C.Rajasekar with reference to their qualifications and experience, the order of the learned single Judge is set aside. 4. The writ appeal is allowed. No order as to costs.