1 UNREPORTED IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.5357 OF 1997. Bhausaheb S/o Vithnu Jadhav, Age 43 years, Occ.Service, R/o 1043/14, Subhashnagar, Dhule,Dist.Dhule. ... Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra. 2. The Chairman, Jijamata Education Society, Arts, Science & Commerce College, Dhule. 3. The Principal, Jijamata Education Society, Arts, Science & Commerce College, Dhule, Dist. Dhule. 4. The North Maharashtra University, Jalgaon through its Registrar, 5. The Joint Director of Education, Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon, 6. The Director of Higher Education, Pune Central Building, Pune-421 001. ... Respondents. ... 2 Mr.Pradeep Deshmukh, advocate holding for Mrs.Smita Deshpande, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.N.B.Patil, Asstt.Govt. Pleader for the State. Mr.A.B.Girase, advocate holding for Mr.R.B.Raghuwanshi, advocate for the Respondent No.4. Mr.S.R.Barlinge, advocate for the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. ... CORAM : B.R.GAVAI AND : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,JJ. Date : 09.07.2010. ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S.V.Gangapurwala,J.) 1. By the present petition, the petitioner takes exception to the order dated 21.10.1997, passed by the Joint Director, Higher Education, Jalgaon Division, Jalgaon and the consequential order dated 3.12.1997 issued by the Principal of the Respondent College. The petitioner also claims directions against the Respondent Nos.3 and 5 from recovering salary which was already paid from 1989-1993 in the pay-scale of Rs. 2200-4000. 2. The petitioner was initially appointed on 3.10.1989 with Respondent No.3. At the 3 relevant time, the said Respondent No.3 was affiliated to Pune University. The petitioner continuously worked in the said College. The petitioner's appointment was also approved by the University of Pune by its order dated 31.3.1995. Thereafter, on the establishment of the North Maharashtra University, the said Respondent NO.3 College was affiliated with the North Maharashtra University. After its affiliation of Respondent No.3 with the North Maharashtra University again afresh selection process was undertaken and afresh approval was granted by the North Maharashtra University to the appointment of the petitioner. 3. In the meantime, the services of the petitioner were terminated on the ground that he is junior and the work load was not available. The present petitioner preferred appeal before the College Tribunal which came to be allowed and the petitioner was directed to be reinstated in service. The said judgment is not challenged by the Respondents. The Tribunal has observed in the said judgment that the petitioner was 4 appointed by following due procedure of law on 3.9.1989 and by duly constituted Selection Committee and the University had also granted approval to the said appointment. The Joint Director was party to the said appeal and he has also not challenged the said judgment and as such findings are deemed to have been accepted by the Respondents. From the record it appears that at no point of time the appointment of the Lecturers in Political Science was more than the approved strength. 4. In the light of the judgment of the Tribunal, the same being binding on the Respondents, the Respondent could not have issued such a letter dated 21.10.1997. The same would tantamount to sitting over the judgment of the College Tribunal. Some of the sentences and the words used in the said letter also would amount to Contempt as it would tend to interfere in the administration of justice. 5. In view of the above, we are inclined to allow the petition by setting aside the 5 impugned order and make Rule absolute in terms of prayer clauses (A), (B) and (C). The Respondent NO.3 Management shall submit the bills in respect of salary of the petitioner in light of what we have observed hereinabove within a period of four (4) weeks from today and the Joint Director shall sanction the same within eight (8) weeks from the receipt thereof. However, there shall be no order as to costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) (B.R.GAVAI,J.) asp/office/wp535797