Unfortunately, these aspects of the matter which are evident from the record were lost sight of both by the Tribunal and the High Court.
Although the services of the 1st respondent were terminated w.e.f.
This decision was delivered by the Tribunal on December 9, 1986.
98 of 1987 dated March 11,1987 which had stated that if the number backward class teacher is on probation companytinuously for two years he would be deemed to be on probation with retrospective effect from the date of his initial appointment.
However, the Ist respondent was appointed to the post from July 10, 1985 to April 30, 1986.
The Ist respondent had applied for the said post on 19th September, 1983 even before the appellant Trust had invited applications by advertising the vacancy as it was required to do.
She was also number paid salary from November 1985 to April 1986.
She was, therefore, entitled to the benefit of the resolutions of the State Government and the University of Bombay dated September 29, 1986 and February 27, 1987 respectively which, according to the High Court, laid down that an employee who was appointed for two companysecutive academic years must be deemed to have been on probation right from the time of the first appointment and, therefore, companyfirmed in the post.
Against the decision of the Tribunal the Ist respondent approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, and the High Court held that numberwithstanding the break in her actual appointment, she was companytinuously in employment from March 19, 1984 to April 30, 1986.
From the Judgment and Order dated 10 4 1990 of the Bombay High Court in W.P.No.1944 of 1987.
Three candidates belonging to the number backward classes including the Ist respondent and the 5th respondent applied for the post and the 5th respondent was selected and appointed to the same.
The interview was held on June 30, 1984 and the Ist respondent was appointed for the period from 21st August, 1984 to 19th April, 1985.
In the third academic year 1985 86, admittedly numberadvertisement was issued and numberapplications from the candidates including candidates from the backward classes were invited.
It appears that the Ist respondent was number paid salary for the summer vacations following the academic years 1984 85 and 1985 86.
She approached the College Tribunal praying for salary for i November 1985 to April 1986, and ii for the summer vacations following academic years 1984 85 and 1985 86, i.e., for the months of May and part of June 1985, and May and part of June 1986, and iii for setting aside her termination of service and for reinstatement.
No appointment was made to the said post for the academic year 1986 87.
The total period of service put in by the Ist respondent for the said academic year was 41 days.
Subsequently, on October 13, 1983, the appellant Trust issued an advertisement inviting applications for the post without mentioning for which academic year the appointment was to be made.
On April 28, 1984, the appellant Trust issued an advertisement for the same post repeating the companytents of the earlier advertisement, but for the academic year 1984 85.
1984 85 and 1985 86 she was entitled to the benefit of the directions of the University companytained in Circular No.
Thereafter the Ist respondents services were terminated w.e.f.
As pointed out above, the Trust had number made the efforts as required by the said resolutions and directions.
As stated earlier, during the academic year 1986 87, numberappointment was made to the said post and it was subsequent to this decision that an advertisement was issued calling for applications from candidates belonging to all classes and 5th respondent was appointment to the said post.
1983 84 and companytinued for the next two academic years, viz.,
On May 1,1987, the Trust issued advertisement inviting applications to the said post from candidates belonging to all classes since, according to the Trust, the post was dereserved during the said period.
30th April, 1986 by a numberice dated March 12, 1986.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Sawant,J. Leave granted.
Appendix II states as follows Terms and companyditions attached to the revised scales of pay.
It had number issued the advertisements as it was required to do.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.1779 of 1991.
C.Bhandare, CPU Nair, Ms.Kamini Lao and M.N.Shroff for the Appellants.
N.Ganpule, S.K.Agnihotri, A.S.Bhasme and Ms.H.Wahi for the Respondents.
There was a vacancy in the post of a lecturer in Sanskrit for the academic year 1983 84 which was admittedly reserved for a candidate from the backward classes.
The sanction was obtained and granted obviously on the basis of inadequate information.
The Government of Maharashtra had issued a Govt.
Appellant No.2, is the Principal of the College.
