LAUKIK TUKARAM KHEDKAR Vs. RAHUL EDUCATION SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule, returnable forthwith.

(2.) The petitioner has challenged the dismissal of his appeal against termination by the School Tribunal. The learned Tribunal has dismissed the appeal on the ground that it has no jurisdiction to grant only the relief of backwages. According to the Tribunal, the petitioner's appeal is not tenable since the petitioner gave up the prayer for reinstatement and restricted his prayer only for backwages. On merits, the Tribunal seems to have taken the view that because the Education Department withdrew the approval granted to the petitioner's appointment on the ground that there was fall in the number of students and, therefore, no work-load, the petitioner did not complete his period of probation satisfactorily.

(3.) Mr. Bandiwadekar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the Tribunal should have seen that the petitioner gave up only the relief of reinstatement because he was employed elsewhere, but nonetheless prayed for backwages. According to the learned counsel, at no point of time, the petitioner gave up the challenge to the termination order and, therefore, the Tribunal was in error in holding that it has no jurisdiction to decide the appeal and that such an appellant was bound to approach some other forum.