PER A.A. SAYED, J.

1. Admit. By consent heard forthwith.

2. This Letters Patent Appeal challenges the impugned order dated 15.4.2002 of the learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing the writ petition of the appellant, whereby the order passed by the learned Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, dismissing the appellant’s appeal, was confirmed.

3. The case of the appellant before the School Tribunal was that he was duly qualified and was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the secondary section of the school of the respondent-management, which is a government aided school. He was appointed on permanent and clear vacancy with effect from July, 1995. However, he was not issued any appointment letter at the time of his appointment. He was working with the said school till his termination on 1.10.1999. According to the appellant, he was pressurised to give in writing that he was appointed in the school since 14.6.1999, and he was also pressurised to give his signatures on blank letterheads and blank papers without any matter and date. He has further alleged that the management had paid him less salary than what he was entitled to and that when the salary was credited directly in his account the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 i.e. the secretary of the Trust and the Head Master of the School, used to take blank cheques signed by the appellant payable to self and used to withdraw the salary and pay the appellant only a part of the same and that they used to keep the cheque book and pass book themselves. The appellant had filed complaints dated 26th July, 1999 and 23rd September, 1999 and 4th October, 1999 to the Education Officer, i.e. respondent No.3 and also to the Police Authorities dated 20th July, 1999, 1st October, 1999 and 4th October, 1999. It is further the case of the appellant that the respondent did not allow the appellant to attend the school and take the lectures with effect from 1st October, 1999. It is contended by the appellant that his services cannot be terminated except by due process of law. He therefore, prayed that the oral termination order dated 1.10.1999 be set aside and he be reinstated with continuity of service with all consequential benefits including back wages, pay and allowances.

4. Per contra, the case of the management was that the appellant had resigned from his duties voluntarily by tendering his resignation from the school vide his letter dated 2nd August, 1999, wherein he had requested that his resignation be accepted with effect from 30th September, 1999. The management accepted the resignation of the appellant, vide letter dated 22nd September, 1999 and the appellant was accordingly issued discharge letter dated 30th September, 1999. It was further contended that there was a farewell function hosted by the management of the school for the appellant and a circular dated 27th September, 1999 was issued in that regard. The management also relied upon the xerox copies of the photographs taken during the farewell party hosted by the school authorities and contended that the original photographs and the negatives were curiously missing. According to the management the Education Officer, respondent No.3 had carried out inspection on 2nd August, 1999 and 5th October, 1999 and the said Education Officer had submitted his inquiry report wherein it was clearly stated that the appellant had voluntarily resigned from his duties. It was the case of the management that the appellant was appointed on temporary basis and it was denied that he was appointed on a permanent and clear vacancy. It was denied by the management that the appellant was continuously working in the school from 11th July, 1999. It was further denied that there was any termination. It was contended that the case of the appellant with regard to the payment of only part of salary to him was absurd in as much as salaries were directly credited to the Bank accounts an