1. This petition by the Management is directed against the judgment of the School Tribunal, Amravati, whereby the Tribunal directed reinstatement of respondent No.1 with effect from 26-6-1991 with back wages.

2. Facts, which are material for deciding this petition, are as under:

Respondent No.1 was M. Com., B. P. Ed. when he was first appointed in a Junior College on 2-8-1985 on a fixed salary of Rs.250/- per month for a period up to 30-6-1986. His appointment was approved by the Deputy Director of Education for the subjects of Commerce and Physical Education on a pay scale of Rs.250-450/-for the Academic Session 1985-86. This appointment was continued by another order dated 28-6-1986 on a fixed pay of Rs.500/- for the Academic Session from 1-7-1986 to 8-5-1987. This too was approved by the Deputy Director of Education for the Academic Session 1986-87. There is a dispute about the next appointment order dated 9-7-1987.

According to the petitioners, respondent No.1 was appointed by order dated 9-7-1987 on a clock-hour basis for the period from 9-7-1987 to 24-3-1988. By order dated 17-10-1988, the Deputy Director of Education approved this appointment on a clock-hour basis at the rate of Rs.12/- per hour with effect from 9-7-1987 till the end of the Academic Session 1987-88. However, according to respondent No.1, this order was fabricated and in fact he was appointed from 9-7-1987 to 8-7-1987 in a clear vacancy. Respondent No.1 relies on a undated order signed by the President of the Society, which does not mention any pay scale, whereas the petitioners rely on an order signed by the Principal of the College.

3. Before respondent No.1 came to be appointed, there was another untrained Teacher Shri G.S. Khule, who had been appointed for teaching Commerce, Co-operation and Physical Education. According to the petitioners, respondent No.1 is a protege of the then President of the Society, who terminated the services of said Shri Khule with effect from 24-3-1988. Shri Khule challanged his termination before the School Tribunal by filing Appeal No.144 of 1988. The Management took a stand in the said appeal that as per the order of the Deputy Director of Education to promote one Shri Yawale, the services of said Shri Khule were terminated. The School Tribunal had granted stay to the termination of Shri Khule, which the then President of the Society one Shri Kalmegh ignored.

4. By order dated 16-12-1988 (16-8-1988?), respondent No.1 was appointed by the President of the Society for a period of two years from 18-8-1988 on a purely temporary basis, stipulating that his services shall stand terminated without any reason. This appointment was not approved by the Deputy Director of Education by his letter dated 22-11-1988, as there was not sufficient workload. Again by letter dated 15-9-1989, the Deputy Director of Education disapproved the appointment of respondent No.1 observing that in spite of the stay order of the School Tribunal in Khule’s proceedings, respondent No.1 was granted continuity in derogation of the rules. Similar order was issued by the Deputy Director of Education on 26-9-1990.

5. In the meantime, there were elections to the Management of the Society on 16-6-1991 and a new Management took over. This Management terminated the services of respondent No.1 with effect from 26-6-1991. Respondent No.1 also claimed to have passed B.Ed. (Revised Course) from Marathwada University in March 1988.

6. Respondent No.1 had sought to intervene in the appeal filed by Shri Khule. Though his prayer for intervention was allowed, eventually while allowing the appeal of Shri Khule on 28-1-1993, the School Tribunal did not grant any relief to respondent No.1 and observed that he was not entitled to any such relief. Respondent No.1 challenged the order of the School Tribunal by filing Writ Petition No.893 of 1993. The said Writ Petition was disposed by judgment dated 23-2-2005, whereby respondent No.1 was permitted to file a separ