JUDGMENT

SAWANT, J.—Leave granted.

2. Appellant 1 is a Trust which runs and manages an Ayurveda College in Bombay. Appellant 2 is the Principal of the College. There was a vacancy in the post of a lecturer in Sanskrit for the academic year 1983-84 which was admittedly reserved for a candidate from the backward classes. Respondent 1 had applied for the said post on September 19, 1983 even before the appellant-Trust had invited applications by advertising the vacancy as it was required to do. Subsequently, on October 13, 1983, the appellant-Trust issued an advertisement inviting applications for the post without mentioning for which academic year the appointment was to be made. The parties before us agree that it was for the academic year 1983-84. In the advertisement, it was specifically mentioned that the post was reserved for a backward class candidate, and if no suitable candidate from the backward classes was available, a candidate from the non-backward classes may be appointed for an year. It appears that within a month thereafter on November 12,1983, a second advertisement was issued repeating the earlier advertisement. No application was received from any candidate from the backward classes in response even to this advertisement, and hence, respondent 1 who had already applied as stated earlier, was appointed to the said post for the period from March 19, 1984 till April 30, 1984. The total period of service put in by respondent 1 for the said academic year was 41 days. On April 28, 1984, the appellant-Trust issued an advertisement for the same post repeating the contents of the earlier advertisement, but for the academic year 1984-85. The applications were invited by April 30, 1984. No candidate from the backward classes applied in response to the said advertisement. The interview was held on June 30, 1984 and respondent 1 was appointed for the period from August 21,1984 to April 19,1985.

3. In the third academic year 1985-86, admittedly no advertisement was issued and no applications from the candidates including candidates from the backward classes were invited. However, respondent 1 was appointed to the post from July 10, 1985 to April 30, 1986. Thereafter respondent 1s services were terminated w.e.f. April 30, 1986 by a notice dated March 12,1986.

4. No appointment was made to the said post for the academic year 1986-87. On May 1, 1987, the Trust issued advertisement inviting applications to the said post from candidates belonging to all classes since, according to the Trust, the post was dereserved during the said period. Three candidates belonging to the non-backward classes including respondent 1 and respondent 5 applied for the post and respondent 5 was selected and appointed to the same.

5. It appears that respondent 1 was not paid salary for the summer vacations following the academic years 1984-85 and 1985-86. She was also not paid salary from November 1985 to April 1986. She approached the College Tribunal praying for salary for (i) November 1985 to April 1986, and (ii) for the summer vacations following academic years 1984-85 and 1985-86, i.e., for the months of May and part of June 1985, and May and part of June 1986, and (iii) for setting aside her termination of service and for reinstatement. The Tribunal allowed her claim for the salary for the relevant periods, but dismissed her claim for reinstatement holding that her appointment was purely temporary and her claim that she should be deemed to have been confirmed because she had served for two academic years was not established in the circumstances of the case. This decision was delivered by the Tribunal on December 9, 1986. As stated earlier, during the academic year 1986-87, no appointment was made to the said post and it was subsequent to this decision that an advertisement was issued calling for applications from candidates belonging to all classes and respondent 5 was appointed to the said post.

6. Against the decision of the Tribunal respondent 1 appr