ssp 1 LPA 37 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENAT APPEAL NO.37 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.9438 OF 2009 Umesh Kashinath Awate .....Appellant versus Bharatiya Kala Prasarini Sabha and Ors. ..... Respondents Mr.Uday P. Warunjikar, for the appellant. CORAM: P.B.MAJMUDAR & A.A.SAYED, JJ. DATE: 16th JUNE, 2011 P.C. : 1. This appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 09-07-2010 in Writ Petition No.1727 of 2010 along with Writ Petition No.9438 of 2009. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge while confirming the order of the School Tribunal, negatived the contention of the appellant that the back wages should have been given from earlier period i.e. from the date of his termination order. In this behalf, it is required to be noted that the appellant had already settled the dispute with the Management and a pursis was filed by way of settlement, which finds place at page 72 in the compilation. As per the ssp 2 LPA 37 of 2011 same, the appellant was asked to resume duties on 09-02-2009. It is pointed out that after the pursis is filed, reinstatement was given after sometime, however, back wages is already granted from the date on which pursis was filed till the actual reinstatement was passed. The claim of the appellant for earlier period cannot be accepted i.e. prior to giving pursis by way of settlement, as he has himself given up the said claim by way of filing pursis. The argument of the learned counsel for the appellant that the back wages is required to be paid from 20-08-2008 to 09-02-2009 cannot be granted. In this behalf, the learned Single Judge in para No.7 has observed thus : 7. In my opinion, the Teacher’s case that he should be granted back wages from 20th August, 2008 cannot be accepted since he had challenged the termination of services effected on that ate by filing Appeal No.24 of 2008 before the School Tribunal. That Appeal was compromised and a joint pursis was filed on 6th February, 2009. No other relief was sought by the teacher in that appeal and in fact parties had agreed that the cause of action has come to end. Therefore, he is not entitled to reopen his claim for wages from 20th August, 2008. However, as regards the amount awarded by the School Tribunal from 9th February, 2009, in my view, the School Tribunal has rightly awarded that amount. There is no need to interfere with the order of the School Tribunal directing the Management of the school to pay backwages from 9th February, 2009 till the teacher’s reinstatement in service. 2. The learned Single Judge has rightly not awarded the said ssp 3 LPA 37 of 2011 amount as claimed by the appellant. In view of the above observations of the learned Single Judge, we do not find any substance in the appeal. Letters Patent Appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. ( A.A.SAYED, J. ) ( P.B.MAJMUDAR, J. )