Judgment (Per :Dabholkar, J.)

1. The appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, impugns the judgment and order passed by learned Single Judge of this High Court on 13.2.2004 in Writ Petition No.3912 of 2000 filed by present Respondent No.1, thereby allowing the same.

2. The factual matrix of the litigation can be described as follows. . Respondent No.1 (henceforth, referred to as "the teacher" for brevity’s sake) was appointed as teacher by present appellant, on 15.6.1987. That appointment was only for one academic year and on temporary basis. She was similarly appointed on temporary basis for the academic years 1988-89 and 1989-90 and she worked (according to the appellants) upto 17.2.1990. It is the claim of the appellant-management (henceforth, "management" for the sake of brevity) that the teacher was again appointed for one academic year, i.e. 1992-93, so also for next academic year 1993-94. Here, the teacher makes a conflicting claim. According to her, she was appointed in the year 1992, on probation for a period of two years. Even the approval granted was for one academic year every time and these appointments as teacher were purely temporary and for a fixed period, which

Click Here to Read the rest of this document