N.K. Patil, J.

Petitioner - party-in-person has sought for a direction, directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner employee with all benefits and full payments of arrears of salary. Further, petitioner - party-in-person has questioned the correctness of the order dated 24th November 2006 on the file of the Member, Educational Appellate Tribunal and Principal District Judge, Belgaum in E.A.T. No.5/l991 vide Annexure-B. Petitioner has also sought for grant of exemplary cost to first respondent - Management for dismissing the petitioner, resulting in stigma on the character of the petitioner.

2. The undisputed facts of the case are that, petitioner-party-in- person, had earlier filed W.P.No.17108/2005 assailing the correctness of the order dated 18th June 2005 passed by the Educational Appellate Tribunal, Belgaum in E.A.T.No.5/1991 vide Annexure-B to the said writ petition. The said writ petition had come up for consideration before this Court on 20th January 2006 and this Court, after considering the oral and documentary evidence and other relevant material available on file, allowed the writ petition filed by petitioner - party-in-person and quashed the impugned order therein i.e. order dated 18th June 2005 in E.A.T.No.5/1991 vide Annexure-B therein and directed the Educational Appellate Tribunal to restore the appeal to its original file and issue notice to both the parties and thereafter decide the questions as to i) Whether the respondent/ management establish the misconduct alleged against the petitioner, from the evidence adduced before the Tribunal? And ii) If the misconduct is proved, whether the penalty imposed is proportionate to the gravity of charges proved? After remand, the Tribunal took up the matter for consideration on 24th September 2006 and on the basis of the pleadings available on file, in obedience of the direction issued by this Court, after considering the written arguments submitted by the petitioner as well as Management, after framing necessary points for consideration and after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and other relevant material available on file, has dismissed the appeal filed by petitioner. Being aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the Educational Appellate Tribunal, and Principal District Judge, Belgaum, passed in EAT.No.5/1991 and seeking appropriate reliefs, as stated supra, petitioner herein felt necessitated to present the instant writ petition.

3. I have heard petitioner - party-in-person and learned Counsel appearing for respondents for considerable length of time.

4. After critical evaluation of the entire original records available on file and after going through the impugned order passed by the Member, Educational Appellate Tribunal and Principal District Judge, Belgaum dated 24th November 2006 vide Annexure- B, it is manifest on the face of the said order that, the Appellate Tribunal has committed an error of law and material irregularity in proceeding to pass the impugned order contrary to the direction issued by this Court dated 20th January 2006 passed in earlier round of litigation in Writ Petition No.17108/2005. It is significant to note that, the appeal filed by petitioner before the Educational Appellate Tribunal in E.A. T.(KPEI) Appeal No.5/1991 on the file of the Member, Educational Appellate Tribunal at Belgaum had come up for consideration before the Predecessor of the Presiding Officer of the Educational Appellate Tribunal who passed the order on 13th February 2004 and the Educ~tional Appellate Tribunal, after hearing both sides, ha; passed the order, setting aside the enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer to the Management holding that, the same is vitiated in depriving the principles of natural justice to the appellant (Petitioner herein). Further, it was held that, the Management was at liberty to adduce evidence before the Tribunal in support of the charges levelled against the appellant therein (petitioner herein)