1. These batch of Writ Petitions arise out of a common order dated 10.1.2012 passed by the Learned Presiding Officer, College Tribunal Mumbai. The learned counsel for the parties agree that common questions of fact and law arise in all these Petitions and that the petitions can be disposed of by this common Judgment.

2. Rule returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties and at their request taken up for final hearing.

3. By these Petitions filed under article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the Petitioner-Solapur University challenges the common Judgment and Order dated 1st November, 2012 passed by the Learned Presiding Officer, University and College Tribunal Solapur University (for short ‘the Tribunal’). By the impugned orders the Tribunal has allowed the appeals preferred by the Respondent No. 1 in each of these Petitions (for short ‘the Respondents’). The Tribunal has quashed and set aside the order dated 10th January, 2012 issued by the Petitioner and has directed reinstatement in service of the concerned Respondents.

4. In short the facts are:-

In the year 2004, the Petitioner-University was constituted by the Government of Maharashtra under the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994. The State Government issued a Government Resolution dated 11th of May, 2007, whereby for the Petitioner-University 150 non-teaching posts were created. Out of these 150 posts 30 posts were to be filled up on contract basis. The finance in regard to the salary grants for these post was to be received by the Petitioner from the State Government. In pursuance of this Government Resolution the Petitioner issued a composite advertisement dated 16 February, 2008 for filling 79 regular post and 30 contractual posts. Under this advertisement the Respondents applied for the nonteaching contractual post, 5 posts of Peon and 2 posts of Junior Clerk. The respondents are seven out of the 30 applicants who applied for the contract posts. The respondents were interviewed by a selection committee.

5. On 12th September, 2008 appointment orders were issued appointing the respondents on contract basis for a period of 11 months. This is an admitted position. The appointment order interalia recorded that the appointment was being done in pursuance of the interview taken by the selection committee as constituted under the Standard Code 1984 on a Government approved post. The pay-scale was stated in clause (1) of the appointment order.

6. As the initial contract appointment of the respondents had come to an end after the expiry of eleven months, they were granted extension for a further period of 11 months and thereafter two extensions of three months. In this regard illustratively a reference can be made to the extension orders issued to Respondent No.1 in Writ Petition No. 646/2013, dated 04/08/2009 (for eleven months period 16-08-2009 to 15-07-2010), extension order dated 26/07/2010 for eleven months or till a regularly selected candidate is appointed whichever is earlier, extension order dated 02/07/2011 and 04/10/2011 for three months or till a regularly selected candidate is appointed whichever is earlier.

7. In order to enable the Petitioner to have regular non teaching posts the State Government issued a fresh Government Resolution being Government Resolution dated 19th September, 2009 whereby approval was granted for creation of 210 posts for non-teaching employees. This was done after a decision and approval of the staffing pattern. The details pertaining to the creations of posts are set out in Annexure-A of this Government Resolution. A perusal of this Government Resolution shows that all these sanctioned non – teaching posts were to be filled up on regular basis and there was no provision made for contractual appointment as done in the previous Government Resolution dated 11th May, 2007.

8. In pursuance of this new Government Resolution dated 19th September, 2009 the Petitioner-University issued an advertisement dat