1. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective sides at length. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by the consent of the parties.

2. Grievance of the petitioner is that he was terminated on 20/01/2009, which was challenged by preferring an appeal before the School Tribunal bearing No.JAL/11/2009. The School Tribunal, by its judgment and order dated 20/09/2013, concluded that Rule 36 and 37 of the M.E.P.S. Rules, have not been followed in conducting the enquiry against the petitioner. The enquiry was, therefore, quashed and set aside.

3. In the operative part of the impugned order, the employer has been granted the liberty to either give up the de novo enquiry and grant all reliefs to the petitioner or to conduct a de novo enquiry. Option was also given to the employer to suspend the petitioner pending the de novo enquiry, if so opted for. However, the employer was directed to first reinstate the petitioner in employment and then to place him under suspension, if so preferred and in the event of conducting a de novo enquiry.

4. Grievance of the petitioner, therefore, is that from the date of termination i.e. 20/01/2009, till the date of reinsta