Point of Law: Service Law - Appointment order issued by a person not authorized to do the same would be nullity and not an irregularity.

JUDGMENT :

G.A. SANAP, J.

1. In this Letters Patent Appeal, challenge is to the Judgment and order dated 04/11/2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.891/2006, whereby the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and quashed and set aside the order passed by the Presiding Officer of School Tribunal, Amravati dated 11/10/2005. The Presiding Officer of School Tribunal, Amravati by the said order dated 11/10/2005 had allowed the appeal filed by the appellant and directed his reinstatement in service with back-wages.

The facts leading to the filing of this Letters Patent Appeal are as follows :-

2. The respondent No.1 is a registered society and registered Public Trust. It runs Smt. Shewantabai Kalmegh High School and Junior College at Chausala, Tq. Anjangaon Surji, Dist. Amravati. It is the case of the appellant that at the time of his first appointment on 02/08/1985 on fixed salary of Rs.250/- per month for a period up to 30/06/1986, he was possessing the qualification of M. Com. B.P.Ed. The Director of Education approved his appointment on pay scale of Rs.250/- - Rs.450/- for Academic Session 1985-1986 for the subjects of Commerce and Physical Education. As per the order dated 28/06/1986, the said appointment was continued for a period from 01/07/1986 to 08/05/1987 on a fixed pay of Rs.500/- per month. The Deputy Director of Education granted approval to this appointment on 23/02/1987. It is the case of the appellant that he was appointed vide order dated 09/07/1987 on clock hour basis for the period from 09/07/1987 to 24/03/1988. The Deputy Director of Education vide order dated 17/10/1988 granted approval to this appointment from 09/07/1987 till the end of Academic Session 1987-1988. The appellant has made a grievance that this order was fabricated because in fact, he was appointed from 09/07/1987 to 24/03/1988 in a clear vacancy.

3. It is further stated that later on, the respondent No.1 by following due procedure appointed the appellant as Lecturer on probation of two years by order dated 18/08/1988. He continued to serve till his oral termination on 26/06/1991. It is his case that on the date of his termination, he had acquired the status of deemed confirmed employee under the provisions of Section 5 (2) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (Hereinafter referred to as "the M.E.P.S. Act").

4. It is the further case of the appellant that one Shri G.S. Khule had challenged his termination by filing an appeal before the School Tribunal. The services of Shri Khule were terminated for want of approval by the Director of Education. The appellant was not appointed on the post held by Shri Khule. It is stated that in the said appeal the management of the respondent No.1 took a stand that as per the order of Deputy Director of Education to promote one Shri Yawle, the services of Shri Khule were terminated. The School Tribunal had granted stay to the termination of Shri Khule. Similarly, the respondent No.1 in Shri Khule's appeal admitted that the appellant was appointed on probation period of two years and on completion of probationary period of two years satisfactorily, acquired the status of deemed confirmed employee. However, in the meantime, the management was changed on 16/06/1991. The new management arbitrarily and illegally, orally terminated the services of the appellant contrary to the provisions of law. According to the appellant, in the appeal filed by Shri Khule bearing No.144/1988, he was allowed to intervene in the said appeal. Appeal filed by Shri Khule was allowed. The appellant had challenged the said Judgment by filing a Writ Petition No.893/1993 and it was disposed of by this Court on 23/02/2005 with a liberty to the appellant to approach the School Tribunal within a period of one month to challenge his termination dated 26/06/1991. The appellant, therefore, challenged his termination contending that he was appointed on a permanent vacanc