1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 142 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 136 OF 2009 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders Shri. P.D.Suryawanshi,Advocate for Appellant. Shri.Ashok Ghuge,Advocate holding for Shri.S.S.Jadhavar,Advocate for Respondent Nos 1 to 3. .... CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND K.K. TATED, JJ. DATE : 8TH OCTOBER,2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner-appellant claims himself to be secretary of the respondent No.3-Society, which is running a school and also employee of the said School. On the basis of plea of oral termination, the appellant claims to have made 2 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders representation to the Education Officer. As he did not receive favourable reply, the appellant filed Writ Petition No. 1119 of 2005, which came to be dismissed in limine, by a speaking order dated 21.02.2005. 3. The appellant, thereafter, waited near about eight months and preferred an Appeal before School Tribunal. An application for condonation of delay in filing appeal was rejected by the Tribunal. The said Order was subject matter before the learned Single Judge. 4. By an order dated 17th June 2009, the learned Single Judge (CORAM : B.R.GAVAI, J.) dismissed the petition. 5. We have perused the reasoning of the learned Single Judge and the 3 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders Tribunal. We do not notice any patent illegality and perversity in the impugned order. There is no merit in the Letters Patent Appeal, the same is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- [K.K. TATED, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL,J.] MTK