JUDGMENT - R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR, J.:---Heard learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records.

2. The petitioner challenges the judgment and order dated 5-8-1999 passed by the School Tribunal Aurangabad in Appeal No. 138 of 1998.

3. Few facts, relevant for the decision, are that the petitioner was appointed as a Peon in the primary school belonging to the respondent No. 3 by an order dated 8th October, 1994 on probation for 2 years commencing from 10th of October, 1994. His appointment was duly approved by the Education Officer respondent No. 2 and the same was communicated to the school under letter dated 29th January, 1995. By letter dated 22nd February, 1997 the respondent No. 2 informed the school that on account of fall in the number of students in the school, the strength of the staff of the school ought to have been reduced in accordance with the provisions of law and yet the management has failed to take appropriate action in that regard and, therefore, in future it would be the responsibility of the management to pay the salary of the excess staff without any liability of the Government to provide grant-in-aid in respect of the excess staff. Since 30th December, 1997,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document