Aggrieved by and dis satisfied therewith, respondent No.2 filed a writ application wherein the learned Single Judge of the High Court by and order dated 27.10.2005 directed as under It is apparent that post of assistant teacher was available and appointment of petitioner against it from 1.7.1996 till session end is approved.
The Division Bench as also the learned Single Judge of the High Court by reason of the impugned orders allowed the respondent No.2 to companytinue in service which is challenged before us by the appellant No.1 which manages the school known as Haidariya Urdu High School.
Respondent No.2 was appointed as Assistant Teacher for the academic session 1996 97 till the end thereof.
The companytention of the appellant, however, is that the performance of respondent No.2 during the period of probation was found to be unsatisfactory and on that ground alone his services were terminated.
His services were terminated by an order dated 3.4.1988 with effect from 9.5.1988 on the ground that his appointment was for a specific period.
He was allegedly put on probation for a period of two years.
Respondent No.2, admittedly, preferred an appeal before the School Tribunal thereagainst and an order of Status quo was passed on 24.4.1998.
The Division Bench of the High Court by reason of the impugned judgment has dismissed an intra Court appeal preferred by the appellants herein.
He was appointed as Incharge Head Master on 28.6.1997.
However, the said appeal preferred by the respondent number2 was dismissed by the School Tribunal on 22.8.2005.
Indisputably, pursuant to or in furtherance of the said order, the respondent No.2 companytinued to work in the appellants school.
ORDER CIVIL APPEAL NO.
4362 /2006 Leave granted.
