-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.2437 OF 2002 Rashtriya Shikshan Sangh & Anr. : Petitioners V/s. State of Maharashtra & Ors. : Respondents ... Mr.S.S.Pakale for the petitioners. Mr.A.P.Vanarse, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for resp. nos.1 & 2. Mr.M.A.Patil for respondent no.3. ... CORAM : S.A. BOBDE, J. DATE : JANUARY 30, 2009. P.C. 1. The petitioners have challenged the order of the School Tribunal reinstating the respondent no.3 in service. 2. Mr.Pakale, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the entire order is vitiated because the Tribunal has proceeded on the assumption without any proof, that the respondent no.3 has, in fact, been appointed on probation. There is no dispute on behalf of the respondents that neither of the parties had produced the actual appointment order. -: 2 :- 3. The contention of Mr.Pakale, the learned counsel for the petitioners, is correct in law. If there is no evidence of a fact before a Court or a Tribunal, the Tribunal is not entitled to draw any presumption except in the cases provided by section 11A to 114A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The present issue does not touch any of those cases. Mr.Machindra Patil, the learned counsel for the respondent no.3, submitted that he is in possession of the actual appointment order which was submitted to the Social Welfare Department, on the basis of which the respondent no.3’s salary was sanctioned. The learned counsel, however, concedes that this documents was not produced before the Tribunal. Having regard to the circumstances of the case and the importance of the fact as to the nature of the appointment of the respondent no.3, I am of view that the matter needs to be remanded back to the School Tribunal for a fresh decision, in accordance with law. 4. In the circumstances, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the School Tribunal for a fresh decision, in accordance with law. The Tribunal to decide the matter not later than six months from the date the parties appear before it. The parties are directed to appear before the School Tribunal on 10.2.2009. All issues are left open. If the respondent no.3 is in -: 3 :- service, he shall not be disturbed on account of any reason pertaining to the present termination order. 5. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No order as to costs. S.A. BOBDE, J.