1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by the consent of the parties.

2. The petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 3.9.2012 passed by the School Tribunal, Aurangabad by which his Appeal No.18/2009 has been dismissed. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 22.4.2013 passed by respondent No.6 Deputy Director of Education, Aurangabad.

3. The contentions of the petitioner can be summarized as follows :-

(a) After following the due procedure of law, the petitioner was appointed as an 'Assistant Teacher' in respondent No.2 school from 25% Graduates' quota.

(b) After completion of his probation of 2 years, he was granted permanency.

(c) Respondent No.3/Education Officer granted approval to the permanent appointment of the petitioner.

(d) In WP No.5184/2007, the Education Officer was directed to consider the grievance of the petitioner.

(e) The appointment of the petitioner was declared to be valid by the directions of the Education Officer dated 25.3.2009 and the appointment of respondent No.4 was held to be invalid.

(f) Respondent No.4 is the son of the President of respondent No.1/Management.

(g) Upon being annoyed by the above, and since