JUDGMENT :

Aravind Kumar, J.

1. These two appeals are directed against the order dated 03.08.2018 passed in W.P. Nos. 42513/2016 and 42514/2016 whereunder the writ petitions filed for quashing of the orders dated 07.04.2016 passed by first respondent herein in Revision Petition No. 3/2012 and Revision Petition No. 5/2013 came to be dismissed by affirming the said orders under which, the order dated 25.05.2011 (Annexure-B) passed by the writ petitioners/appellants retrenching respondents 3 to 6 came to be set aside with a direction to reconsider the same and to accommodate them in other colleges run by the first appellant herein.

2. Parties are referred to as per their rank before the learned Single Judge.

3. Respondents 3 to 6 (in W.A. 2904/2018) were appointed as part-time lecturers in Sociology, Economics, English and History subjects on 01.01.1991, 20.08.1986, 30.04.2001 and 10.11.1986 respectively by the first petitioner-trust. These respondents challenged the orders dated 30.11.2009 of the Department of Collegiate Education under which they had declined to admit them to grant in aid, by filing W.P. Nos. 74/2009 and 230-232/2009. Said writ petitions came to be disposed of by order dated 30.11.2009 whereunder fourth respondent therein i.e., second appellant herein was directed to consider the petitioner's claim in accordance with the directions issued by the Apex Court in S.S. Anand and others vs. The Management of Mahatma Gandhi Vidyapeeta (Regd.) Bangalore and another reported (1998) 3 KLJ 293. By order dated 03.04.2010 (Annexure-D) said prayer of respondents 3 to 6 came to be rejected and communicated to them. Being aggrieved by the said endorsement, respondents 3 to 6 herein filed Revision Petition No. 3/2012.

4. In the meanwhile, first petitioner-Trust on the ground there were no good number of admissions, decided to close down the second petitioner - law college and the said course. In that regard a meeting of the first petitioner-trust came to be conducted on 20.01.2011 (Annexure-F) and a resolution came to be passed for closing down 5 year course in the second petitioner-college. The Karnataka State Law University, Hubli by communication dated 18.04.2011 and the Government of Karnataka by order dated 08.04.2011 granted permission for closing down the 5 years law course.

5. Being aggrieved by the endorsement dated 03.04.2010, respondents 3 to 6 herein had filed W.P. Nos. 35754-757/2010 and learned Single Judge disposed of the said writ petitions by order dated 28.09.2012 directing them to approach the Government under Section 131 of the Karnataka Education Act against the order of retrenchment and directed the revisional authorities to decide the same on merits by issuing notice to the respondents therein.

6. Being aggrieved by the decision of first petitioner-Trust for closing down the course, the respondents 3 to 6 herein filed W.P. Nos. 19534-536/2011, which came to be disposed of by order dated 28.09.2012, permitting respondents 3 to 6 herein who were petitioners therein to file revision under Section 131 of the Karnataka Education Act and kept open all the contentions. Being aggrieved by the said order, respondents 3, 4 and 6 filed W.A. Nos. 7009-7011/2012, which came to be dismissed by order dated 26.09.2013. However, the liberty which was granted by the learned Single Judge to respondents 3 to 6 herein to file a revision under Section 131 of the Karnataka Education Act was kept intact and 30 days time was extended to file revision petition from the date of receipt of copy of the order passed in writ appeal.

7. Hence, respondents 3 to 6 herein filed Revision Petition No. 5/2013 and another review petition in R.P. No. 6/2013 under Section 133 of Karnataka Education Act. By order dated 07.04.2016 the second respondent allowed Revision Petition No. 3/2012 by setting aside the endorsement dated 03.04.2010 and directing respondent Nos. 1 and 2 therein to pay salaries to the petitioners equal to the salary paid to the govern