1 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 390 OF 2009 Ramkrishna Kondaji Jagdale (since deceased) through his L.R.s) Shri Vivekanand Ramkrishna Jagdale & ors. ... Appellants v/s 1. The Nashik Zilla Parishad 2. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondents Mr.M.S.Karnik for the appellants. Nobody present for the respondents. CORAM: SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 6TH OCTOBER, 2009 P.C.: 1. The appellants are the legal heirs and representatives of Ramakrishna Kondaji Jagdale, who was employed with the respondent No.2 initially. His services were transferred to the respondent No.1 and he was confirmed in service of the Zilla Parishad. It appears that the employee’s services were terminated on 18.8.1982. A suit was filed by him before the Civil Judge, Sr. Divn., Nashik, for a declaration that his 2 services had been illegally terminated and for arrears of salary. The suit was dismissed by the Civil Court. It was held that the plaintiff i.e. the employee had not proved that he had made any attempt to report for duty between 15.1.1974 and 29.7.1974. It was further held that the employee had not proved that the order of termination was illegal. These findings were recorded after evidence was led before the Trial Court. 2. Aggrieved by the decision of the Trial Court of dismissing the suit, the legal heirs of the employee who had expired during the pendency of the proceedings, filed a Civil Appeal No.98 of 2001. That appeal was also dismissed. 3. In my opinion, no substantial question of law arises for this Court’s consideration. Both the Courts below have dismissed the suit on assessing the evidence led before the Trial Court and on concluding that the employee was unable to prove that his services had been illegally terminated. These are concurrent findings of fact which need not be disturbed in a second appeal. 4. Second appeal dismissed. ..... 3 4