- (1.) Leave Granted.
(2.) This appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 7 th May, 2010 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, whereby M.C.A. (Review) No.1479 of 2009 in Letters Patent Appeal No.386 of 2008 has been allowed and the judgment of the School Tribunal to the extent the same awarded back wages to the appellant has been set aside.[
(3.) When the matter came up before us for hearing on 27 th February, 2012, learned counsel for the parties made their submissions extensively but sought liberty to mention the matter again if the parties were able to negotiate an amicable settlement on the question of back wages claimed by the appellant Only to recapitulate the line of arguments advanced before us we may mention that learned counsel for the appellant had placed reliance upon the decisions of this Court in U.P. State Brassware Corpn. Ltd. & Anr. v. Uday Narain Pandey, 2006 1 SCC 479, Reetu Marbles v. Brabhakant Shkla, 2010 2 SCC 70, and Metropolitan Transport Corporation v. V. Venkatesan, 2009 9 SCC 601, to contend that back wages could be awarded to the appellant even in the absence of a specific assertion by the appellant to the effect that he was not gainfully employed during the period he remained out of service. It was argued by learned counsel for the appellant on the strength of the above decisions that back wages could range between 25% to 60%.;