1 RMA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (ST) NO. 25960 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2703 OF 2009 President, Swami Vivekanand Shikshan Sanshta and Another .. Petitioners Vs Baburao Gulabrao Mane and Ors .. Respondents Mr. Vinod Jadhav for the Petitioners Mr. S.A. Rajeshirke for Respondent No. 1 Mr. S.D. Rayrikar, AGP for the State CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J DATE : 25th JUNE, 2010 IN CHAMBER AT 2.40 P.M. P.C.: 1. The petitioner has preferred this petition for recalling and reviewing the order dated 04.08.2009 passed in Writ Petition No. 2703 of 2009. 2. The petitioner is an educational institution. Respondent No. 1 is the assistant teacher. Respondent NO. 2 is the educational officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Satara. 3. Respondent No. 1 is the assistant teacher who has been terminated by the petitioner with effect from 12.04.2002. He preferred appeal before the School Tribunal. The said appeal came to be rejected, hence, he preferred Writ Petition No. 2703 of 2009. The Writ Petition came to be 2.rpwst25960-09 2 disposed of by the order dated 04.08.2009. During pendency of the matter, the petitioner-Educational Institution and respondent no. 1 who was the assistant teacher in the said institution amicably settled the matter between themselves and original respondent nos. 1 to 3 agreed to reinstate the petitioner. Learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 also tendered resolution passed by their management which was also taken on record. In the said resolution, it was stated that respondent nos. 1 to 3 agreed to reinstate the petitioner with immediate effect on the same post with continuity of service and benefits arising out of continuity of service and the petitioner had agreed to waive the entire amount of backwages and the petitioner stated that he would not claim amount of backwages from any of the respondents. In view of the fact that the order was passed by consent, now the petitioner-Educational Institution cannot seek recalling or review of the said order. 4. In view of the consent terms passed, the petitioners have to reinstate the present respondent no. 1 and comply with the order dated 04.08.2009. 5. Learned A.G.P. states that if the management reinstates respondent no. 1 and proposal for approval is submitted by the management to the Educational Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Satara, such proposal will be considered 2.rpwst25960-09 3 as per rules. He has also filed affidavit of Mr. Sambhaji Jangam, Deputy Educational Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Satara to the above effect. If such proposal for approval is submitted by the management, the said proposal to be considered expeditiously and as far as possible within 10 weeks from the date of receipt of the proposal. 6. In view of the above facts, no case is made out for review or recalling the order dated 04.08.2009 and it is clear that the petitioner has to comply with the order dated 04.08.2003. 7. Petition is accordingly disposed of. [SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] 2.rpwst25960-09