1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 221 OF 2009 Ravindra Govindrao Surwase .. Appellant Versus Dattatraya Govindrao Survase and others. ..Respondent. --- Mr. A.V. Patil, Advocate holding for Mr. V.D. Gunale, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. R.J. Godbole, Advocate for respondent NO.1. Mr. P.P. More, AGP for respondent No.4 Mr. R.C. Jadhavar, Advocate holding for Mr. N.P. Patil Jamalpurkar, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 CORAM : A.P. DESHPANDE & N.D. DESHPANDE,JJ. DATE : 12TH JANUARY, 2010. ORAL ORDER :- 1] This LPA is at the behest of one Ravindra G. Surwase, making a grievance that the observations made by the learned Single Judge while disposing of W.P. No. 440/2001, vide judgment dated 18th July, 2009, are being misconstrued and misinterpreted by the management and the petitioner is made to suffer on that count. 2 2] One Dattatraya G. Surwase, was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the school and on account of his oral termination, he filed appeal before the school Tribunal. Dattatraya, being of the view that present appellant was appointed in a vacancy arisen on account of his termination, impleaded the present appellant as party respondent before the tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by Dattatraya and after allowing the appeal went on to issue further directions declaring that the appointment of the present appellant was illegal. Aggrieved by the directions contained at Sr.No.3 of the operative part of the order passed by the Tribunal, the present appellant preferred a writ petition which was heard and decided by the learned Single Judge. 3] The learned Single Judge his his judgment has set aside the direction contained at Sr.No.3 in the operative part of the order of the Tribunal by observing that the legality or otherwise of the appointment of the present appellant was never the subject matter in issue before the Tribunal an hence, the Tribunal was not justified in opining upon the legality or otherwise of the appointment of the appellant. 3 4] As stated hereinabove, in substance, the petition filed by the present appellant has been allowed by the learned Single Judge. Despite the same, the present appeal has been filed by making a grievance that the observations made by the learned Single Judge are being misconstrued by the management and the appellant has been wrongly terminated by order dated 1/9/2009. 5] We are of the clear view that the grievance of the present appellant was fully redressed by the impugned judgment. If by misreading the judgment of the learned Single Judge the management has terminated the services of the present appellant, it is open for him to question the correctness thereof by filing an appeal before the School Tribunal. The present LPA is misconceived, inasmuch as, the judgment of the learned Single Judge goes to fully and completely redress the grievance of the present appellant to the extent raised in the writ petition. In that view of the matter, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 6] The learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1 has contended that the present LPA is not maintainable as the impugned judgment passed by the learned Single Judge was in a 4 petition invoking jurisdiction of the learned single Judge solely under Article 227 of the Constitution. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Division Bench of this court reported in 2004 (4) Mh.L.J. 1105 “ Mansaram Sampat Patil through LRs Vs. Sambhu Harchand Chaudhari through LR.” 7] True it is, that the LPA is not maintainable. In the result, the appeal stands dismissed. It is clarified that it shall be open for the appellant to avail the alternative remedy, by filing an appeal before the School Tribunal. 8] At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant submits that liberty be granted to the appellant to approach the authorities in the Education Department, seeking his absorption in some other school, in view of the fact that, the appellant has completed allegedly 13 years of continuous service. Liberty granted. [N.D. DESHPANDE,J.] [A.P. DESHPANDE.J.] Grt/- 5