1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Letters Patent Appeal No.366 of 2007 In Writ Petition No.3254 of 2007 (D) (Satchikitsa Prasarak Mandal and another v. Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Amravati, and others) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-- Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions : Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Shri Suresh Dhole, Advocate for Appellants. Shri T.R. Kankale, AGP for R- 1 and 3. Dr. Anjan De, Advocate for R- 2. CORAM : K.J. Rohee & R.C. Chavan, JJ. DATE : 31st January, 2008 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. It was contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that respondent No.2 applied for being appointed on honorary basis on 21-6-2002 and that from April 2003 she did not report to duty. However, the learned Presiding Officer of the School Tribunal, after perusing the documents maintained by the appellants, came to the conclusion that respondent No.2 was appointed on 19-7-1995 in a clear permanent vacancy and she continued to discharge the duties of the Assistant Teacher at least till April 2003. The School Tribunal held that oral termination of respondent No.2 is illegal. This finding of the School Tribunal was confirmed by the learned Single Judge. In view of the concurrent findings we see no reason to interfere. 2 3. The Letters Patent Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE pdl