K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.

The question that has come up for consideration in all these cases is whether the order of the management dated 12.7.2000 terminating the probation and reverting the Principal Dr. N. Raveendran as Selection Grade Lecturer is legal or not. The University Appellate Tribunal by its order dated 6.4.2001 set aside the order of reversion and directed the Management to appoint Dr. N. Raveendran as Principal forthwith. Management took up the stand that the termination and reversion was effected while the Principal was on probation. Dr. Raveendran took refuge under the deeming provision of S.59(7) of the Calicut University Act and submitted that the termination of probation and reversion is bad in law.

2. O.P. No. 14601 of 2001 was filed by the Management challenging the order dated 6.4.2001 passed by the Calicut University Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 8 of 2000.O.P. No. 13641 of 2001 was filed by Dr. N. Raveendran seeking a direction to the Management to appoint him as Principal of S.N. College, Kollam or Principal of any other college in the Kerala University in implementation of the order of the University Appellate Tribunal. On a petition filed by Dr. N. Raveendran, C.M.P. No. 21745 of 2001, learned single judge passed an order directing the Management to post him as Principal as directed by the University Appellate Tribunal, subject to the availability of vacancy. Aggrieved by the said order Dr. N. Raveendran has filed W.A. No. 1633 of 2001 and Management filed W.A. No. 1598 of 2001.

3. When the appeals came up for hearing, we posted the Original Petitions also for disposal. We heard counsel for the Management Sri. A.N. Rajan Babu and Sri. R. Krishnaraj, counsel for Dr. N. Raveendran.

4. Dr. N. Raveendran was appointed as Principal after undergoing due process of selection by order No. 2/SNT/1971 dated 5.10.1998. He was posted as Principal of S.N. College at Chelanoor where he joined duty on 6.10.1998. The selection and appointment of Dr. Raveendran was challenged by two other applicants by filing appeals before the University Appellate Tribunal as appeal numbers 9/98 and 11/98. Management defended the selection. Ultimately those appeals were dismissed by the Tribunal.

5. While working as Principal, Dr. Raveendran was served with a show cause notice dated 17.1.2000 stating that his service as Principal during the period of probation was not satisfactory and hence he was not found suitable for continuance as Principal and it was provisionally decided to terminate his probation and to revert him to the post of Selection Grade Lecturer in History. Management gave 15 days time to submit his objections, if any. Dr. Raveendran filed detailed objection on 3.2.2000. He refuted the various allegations levelled against him and contended if those allegations are allowed to stand the same would cast a stigma on him. To substantiate his case, Dr. Raveendran produced Exts. Al to A6 and All to A13 documents before the Tribunal. It was pointed out by him that the allegations levelled against him were false and baseless and were made without conducting proper enquiry and would amount to punishment. According to Dr. Raveendran, he joined as Principal as per order dated 5.10.1998 and that he had completed probation on 5.10.1999. According to him, under S.59(7) of the Calicut University Act he should be deemed to have been confirmed as Principal on 5.10.1999. According to him, even before the issue of show cause notice, he had completed his probation and he should be deemed to have been confirmed in the post of Principal.

6. The Tribunal after considering the entire aspects of the matter accepted the contention of the Principal that he had completed the period of probation before the issuance of the show cause notice and that he should be deemed to have been confirmed in the post of Principal. The Tribunal took the view that after the completion of the probation, the Management cannot terminate the probation and rever