Order

1. Delay condoned.

2. Leave granted.

3. The appellant was appointed as the Headmaster of Shri Ramdas High School, Amona, Goa on 25th May, 1970 in the pay scale of Rs. 325-575/-. He was confirmed in the post of Headmaster after completion of the period of probation on 1.6.1972. Shri Ramdas High School, which was a private school, was taken over by the Government, alongwith the staff working in the said school w.e.f. 1.4.1974. At the time when the school was taken over, the appellant was drawing his pay in the re­vised pay scale of Rs. 400/-. After the take over of the school vide an order dated 13th June, 1974, the Government appointed the appellant as Headmaster of Government Middle School at Saligao in the pay scale of Rs. 300-25-450-EB-25-600. Appellant protested against his appoint­ment as Headmaster of the Middle School, since earlier he had been working as a Headmaster of the High School. The appellant, after having joined the post of the Headmaster of the Middle School, made various representations. He cited cases of some others to point out the injustice that had been done to him. On 13th January, 1993, the appellant was promoted to the post of Deputy Education Officer in the Directorate of Education on ad-hoc basis.

4. The representations made by the appellant from time to time were considered by the Government and on 16.2.1994, an order came to be made whereby the appellant was absorbed as a Headmaster of Government High School with retrospective effect from the date of take over of the School, i.e. with effect from 1.4.1974 with all consequential benefits flowing therefrom. The earlier order dated 10.6.1974 was rescinded. Since, the consequential benefits, as granted by the Gov­ernment in its order dated 16.2.1994, were not given to the appellant, he filed Writ Petition No. 261/1996 in the High Court of Bombay at Goa. The precise issue raised in the writ petition was with regard to the failure to give consequential benefits to him as flowing from the order of the Government, dated 16.2.1994. On 14th July, 1998, the writ petition was heard and disposed off. So far as the consequential benefits are concerned, the appellant was given the liberty to make a representation to the department and the department was directed to decide that representation within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the representation.

5. In para - 2 of the order of the High Court, dated 14th July, 1998, the learned Bench observed :--

“2. During the course of hearing it was revealed that the absorption of the petitioner against the post of Headmaster in a middle School was with his consent. Mr. Lotlikar tried to urge that consent was obtained under duress and coercion. It is painful to note that such averment was not incorporated in the petition. We treat this as material suppression. We do not propose to entertain the petition.”

6. The appellant, being aggrieved of this direction, has filed this appeal by special leave. During the pendency of the proceedings in this Court the Government, influenced by the observations made in para-2 of the order of the High Court, dated 14th July, 1998 (supra), made an order on 21st/22nd January, 1999. The Government not only rejected the request of the appellant for grant of consequential benefits flowing from the earlier order dated 16.2.1994 but even rescinded the order of absorption of the appellant as Headmaster of the Government High School without putting the appellant to any notice and without hearing him in that behalf.

7. It is not disputed before us that the issue before the High Court in Writ Petition No. 261/96 was a limited one, confined to the grant of consequential benefits. The observations made in para - 2 (supra) were, in our opinion, strictly speaking, not called for. Those obser­vations have led to the passing of the order dated 21st/22nd January, 1999. In the counter filed on behalf of the respondents to the spe­cial leave petition, it has been stated in para-2 of the prelim