1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.3964/2010 Vivekanand Dyanpeeth Convent, Warora and another Vs. Sukhadeo M. Matte and others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. Anjan De, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. P. N. Shende, Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2. CORAM: B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 23rd SEPTMBER, 2010. 1] Heard. 2] Learned AGP Thakre for respondent no.3 states that he is awaiting instructions. 3] I have perused the impugned judgment delivered by the School Tribunal. The School Tribunal has recorded a finding that the Management did not produce anything to show that appointment of present respondents 1 and 2 was against any reserved vacancy. The petitioners are not in a position to demonstrate that said finding is perverse. The second contention of Advocate De termination is of the year 2009. It has been set aside in 2010 by granting full back wages. He states that grant of full back wages in the present circumstances for such a long period is not justified. 4] Advocate Shende for respondents 1 and 2 points out 2 that specific affidavit was filed before the School Tribunal disclosing that the respondents were never gainfully employed. He, therefore, asserts that grant of full back wages is in accordance with law. 5] Looking to the facts of the matter and the nature of controversy, I find that interest of justice can be met with by reducing the said grant to 75%. Only to that extent, the impugned judgment of School Tribunal is modified. The petitioners are directed to reinstate respondents 1 and 2 with continuity and 75% back wages in terms of direction issued by the School Tribunal. 6] With the above direction, the writ petition is partly allowed. No costs. JUDGE Ambulkar.