VIJAY S/O SITARAM SANAP Vs. MANKARNIKABAI PARNERKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule returnable forthwith. By the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) Petitioner filed appeal before the School Tribunal, at Latur challenging his oral termination as an Assistant Teacher by respondents No.1 and 2. By an order dated 29/07/1993 notices were issued by the Tribunal and ad interim ex parte stay to the impugned oral termination was granted. By an order dated 30/4/2004 the appeal was dismissed in default. Restoration application was filed on 25/4/2005. It is stated across the bar that on the same day the Presiding Officer of School Tribunal directed parties to maintain status quo as on the date in respect of interim relief granted by the Tribunal on 29/7/1993. By an order dated 25/10/2007 the restoration application was dismissed by the Tribunal.

(3.) The learned counsel Shri.Sandeep Gorde Patil submitted that the interim relief was operating in favour of petitioner since last so many years. After the restoration application was filed, the file of the petitioner along with other files were transferred to the office of School Tribunal established at Latur from Aurangabad. Petitioner, therefore, could not make suitable arrangement for filing a separate application explaining delay occurred in filing restoration application, even though the petitioner had explained the delay in para 6 of the restoration application. It was submitted that the petitioner had put in service of more than 19 years and it would be harsh if the petitioner s appeal was allowed to be dismissed without contesting the same on merits.