(1.) Both these writ petitions are filed by the Employer challenging the judgment of the School Tribunal, granting relief of reinstatement to the employees. The question about the effect of ternporary appointment or time bound appointment made by the management vis-a-vis the provisions of section 5 of the Maharashtra employees of Private Schools (Conditions of service) Regulation Act, 1977, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) arise in both these writ petitions.
(2.) In Writ Petition No. 1407 of 1997, challenge is to the judgment of School Tribunal dated 2-5-1997 by which the School Tribunal has allowed the appeal of respondent No. 2 - employee and has directed the management to reinstate him back in service with continuity and back wages. This Court has while issuing notice in the matter ordered parties to maintain status quo and said order continues to operate till today. The said order was later on clarified while issuing Rule. It appears that thereafter vacancy became available and hence this Court on 10-10-2003 directed the management to appoint respondent No. 2 - employee against that vacancy. The said order has been set aside by the Division Bench in L. P. A. No. 37 of 2004 on 29-3-2004 observing that in earlier L. P. A. No. 31 of 1998, the earlier order of learned Single Judge restricting stay only to back wages was set aside and the Division Bench there continued the interim order dated 23-3-1998 till disposal of Writ Petition No. 1407 of 1997. Thus, respondent No. 2 in this petition is out of employment.
(3.) In Writ Petition No. 1355 of 1996, the management has challenged the judgment of School Tribunal dated 15-4-1996 by which the School Tribunal has granted relief of reinstatement with continuity and backwages to respondent No. 1 - employee. This Court has on 22-7-1996 only issued Rule in the matter and respondent No. 1 is currently in service. He has put in about 16 years of service and he is now a duly approved employee by education department.