DATTA SHELKE EDUCATION SOCIETY Vs. NAMDEO SHANKAR PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner No.1 is a society which runs the petitioner No.2 school. In 1993, the Petitioner No.2 school was established by Petitioner No.1 with the consent of Group Grampanchayat, Parale, Ninai and the Deputy Director of Education the Petitioners commenced the 8th standard in the academic year 1993-94. Permission to start 9th and 10th standard classes was also granted later. An advertisement was published by the petitioners on 9.5.1994 for recruiting assistant teachers and peons from the ST/NT categories. The candidates were invited for an interview on 3.6.1994. On the selection process being completed Respondent No.1 was appointed as an assistant teacher in the school from 10.12.1994. This appointment according to the petitioners was for a temporary period till they found a suitably qualified candidate to occupy the post. No appointment letter was issued to Respondent No.1 when he joined duty on 10.12.1994. On 19.9.1995, an advertisement was issued by the petitioners for filling up the posts of assistant teachers and peons from the reserved category of ST and NT.

(2.) Interviews were held again. Since there was no suitable candidate other than Respondent No.1 though he did not belong to the category nor was he a trained graduate teacher, he was appointed on a year to year basis. The petitioners contend that an undertaking was submitted by Respondent No.1 that he would not claim any right to the post since he was appointed against a reserved category post. According to the Petitioners, Respondent No.1 left service of his own accord and joined the college at Tardal on 13.6.1996 for obtaining training for the degree of Bachelor of Physical Education. Respondent No.1 filed appeal No.153 of 1996 before the Tribunal on 16.7.1996. He pleaded therein that his services had been illegally terminated by the petitioners. He contended that he was appointed in a permanent clear vacancy and, therefore, was not liable to be terminated on the ground that a suitable candidate from the reserved category had been found by the petitioners.

(3.) It appears that the appeal was heard and decided by the School Tribunal on 19.6.1997. Aggrieved by that order, the petitioners preferred a writ petition in this Court. That petition was disposed of remanding the matter to the School Tribunal. An application was filed by the petitioners for amending their written statement. It appears that the amendment was granted. Thereafter the School Tribunal passed the impugned order dated 30.6.1999 directing the petitioners to reinstate respondent No.1 with backwages to the extent of 20%. W.P. No.5507 OF 1999