SATISH HANMANTRAO DIKALE Vs. JAGDAMBA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard the strenuous submissions of Mr.Patil on behalf of the petitioner and Mr.Tele, learned Advocate on behalf of the respondent/Management. With their assistance, I have gone through the petition paper book and they have appraised me with the subsequent events that have occurred during the pendency of this petition.

(2.) There is no dispute that after the petitioner was engaged as an "Assistant Teacher" for the academic year 1992-93, since he had acquired the qualification of B.Sc. B.P.Ed., he was disengaged on 13/06/1996 for the only reason that an approval was not accorded by the Education Department. He was, however, continued in employment and the termination was not given effect to. He, therefore, approached the School Tribunal by filing Appeal No.124/1996. The said appeal was dismissed by the impugned order dated 06/11/1999 on account of the reasons that the petitioner was not granted approval and there was a pendency of the backlog.

(3.) This Court, by order dated 12/01/2000, granted interim relief to the petitioner and protected his services. Learned Advocate for the Management informs that the petitioner has, therefore, continued in employment and there was no interruption in his service since the Tribunal had also protected him against termination. Now, the entire backlog has been filled in. The petitioner is in regular employment and he has also been accorded approval by the Education Department.