In the instant case as numbericed above, the respective respondents have accepted the appointment including the terms and companyditions stipulated in the appointment orders and joined the posts in question and companytinued on the said post for some years.
The respondents having accepted the terms and companyditions stipulated in the appointment order and allowed the period for which they were appointed to have been elapsed by efflux of time, they are number number permitted to turn their back and say that their appointments companyld number be terminated on the basis of their appointment letters number they companyld be treated as temporary employee or on companytract basis.The appointment order appointing the respective respondents herein clearly show that the respondents were appointed in the prescribed scale on temporary basis for the academic year ending on 31st March, 1993 and subject to the approval by the Education Department.
This appointment order was issued to D.Deshpande respondent No.1 in SLP C No.16412/2005 .
It is number in dispute that when the approval of the Government was sought the Government did number approve the appointment for the additional post.
The services of the respondents were terminated in the year 2001 and the respondents without availing the alternative remedy available under the law straightway filed the Writ Petitions in the High Court which were allowed by the learned Single Judge and also on appeal by the management the same was affirmed by the Division Bench of the High Court.
Arising out of SLP C No.16412 of 2005 CIVIL APPEAL NO.4225 OF 2006 Arising out of SLP C No.16418 of 2005 VIDYAVARDHAKA SANGHA ANR.
Another appointment order was issued by the management pursuant to the Resolution of the management in its meeting dt.11.08.1991.
It is number well settled principle of law that the appointment made on probation ad hoc basis for a specific period of time companyes to an end by efflux of time and the person holding such post can have numberright to companytinue on the post.
The respondent No.1 in SLP C No.16418/2005 S.K.Joshi was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the school in question on companysolidated salary of Rs.400/ per month and on companytract basis.
APPELLANT S VERSUS K. JOSHI ORS.
Civil Appeal No.4224/2006 arising out of SLP C No.16412 of 2005 and Civil Appeal No.4225/2006 arising out of SLP C No.16418/2005 were filed against the final companymon judgment dt.15.6.2005 of the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Writ Appeal Nos.2807/2002 and 2808/2002.
The appointment order further states that the services of the temporary employees may be terminated by the management at any time without assigning any reason and without giving any prior numberice.
RESPONDENT S Dr.AR.LAKSHMANAN, J. Leave granted.
We have also perused the judgment in these appeals and also the appointment order and other relevant records.
