1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No.203 of 2011 Bhartiya Shikshan Sanstha VERSUS Smt.Vidhya Dhakate and others. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : MAY 04 , 2011 . Heard Shri H.R. Deshpande, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Shende, the learned counsel for respondent no.1 and Shri Parihar, the learned Assistant Govt. Pleader for respondent no.2. By this petition, the petitioners have impugned the judgment passed by the School Tribunal, Chandrapur on 16.12.2010, directing the petitioners to reinstate the respondent no. 1 in service with continuity of service and 25% back wages. After the notice was issued to the respondents, it appears that the parties entered into a settlement as the respondent no. 1 was ready and willing to give up her claim of 25% back wages and the petitioners were ready to reinstate the respondent no.1 in service w.e.f. 7.5.2011 with continuity in service. A joint compromise pursis signed by the petitioners and the respondent no.1 is presented in the court 2 today. The same is accepted and marked as Ex. ‘Z’ for the purpose of identification. It is stated in the joint pursis that the respondent no. 1 would give up her claim of 25% back wages and the petitioners would reinstate the respondent no. 1 in service w.e.f. 7.5.2011 with continuity in service. The terms and conditions of the settlement appear to be just and reasonable. The parties are personally present in the court today and inform the court that the matter is settled between the parties in terms of the joint pursis. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the pursis. Since the respondent no.1 was a confirmed and permanent teacher and the approval was granted by the Education Department to her appointment and since the Education Officer has not challenged the order of the School Tribunal, the Education Officer shall consider the proposal in regard to the reinstatement of the respondent no.1 in service from 7.5.2011 with continuity in service and grant approval to the same. The writ petition is disposed of with no order as to costs. JUDGE Hirekhan