JUDGMENT :

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard learned Counsels for the parties.

2. All these petitions by the employer, challenge the judgments delivered by the learned School Tribunal, Amravati dated 23/3/2016 in Appeals filed by the employees who were terminated by the petitioners, which termination has been set aside by the learned School Tribunal by the impugned judgments. Since a common question arises in these petitions, as indicated below these petitions have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

3. In Writ Petition No.4272/2016 the respondent no.3-Shri Manohar Govindram Kalalkar, had in pursuance to an advertisement in daily news paper ‘Hindustan’’ published on 12/1/2008 by the petitioner, applied and was initially, by an order dated 1/2/2008 appointed as a Laboratory Attendant on contract basis in the Electronics and Telecommunication Department of the Polytechnic College, run by the petitioner no.1, having been selected in the interview held on 15/1/2008, and having been recommended by the Selection Committee. The appointment was stated to be temporary and on contract basis for the academic session 2007-2008 on fixed remuneration of R