JULIETA COTTA Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher on purely temporary basis on 6.3.95 till the end of academic year 1994-95. She was given fresh appointment letter on 3.6. 95 appointing her purely on temporary basis upto the end of academic year 1995-96. THE services of the petitioner were discontinued on 20th April, 1996. Prior to that, on 15th April, 1996 the petitioner represented to the respondent no. 3 that her appointment could not be terminated with effect from 21.4.96 and in the eye of law she continued to be in service of the school in the substantive vacancy on probation even after 20th April, 1996. THEreafter, on 17th April, 1996, petitioner withdrew the said letter by tendering unqualified apology. According to the petitioner, she was informed that during every academic year she would be issued a fresh appointment letter till petitioner acquires training qualification and that she had withdrawn the said letter because the Principal namely respondent no. 3 had assured her that she would be reappointed in the next academic year 1996-97 in case the makes an application. She also claimed that she performed her duty diligently. THEse facts are in fact disputed by the Principal (respondent no. 3 ). THE petition is thus partly based upon disputed questions of facts which this Court in writ jurisdiction cannot examine.

(2.) THE post was advertised during 1996-97 session. THE petitioner as well as the respondent no. 4 applied for the said post and respondent no. 4 was selected on merits. THE petitioner substantially seeks to challenge the said appointment of respondent no. 4 in this petition and contends that her appointment was on probation which could not be terminated vide letter dated 29.3.96.

(3.) MOREOVER, the petitioner had also competed with respondent no. 4 who was found fit for appointment as against the petitioner and it is not for us to examine the merits of the candidates which have been appreciated by the selection committee.