K. Jagannatha Shetty, J. - (1.) This is the third time the matter is coming before this Court and we hope that this is the last of a series of litigations between the parties.
(2.) We have helpfully provided with a chronology of the events leading up to this appeal. It Is important that the chronology is made clear. It is as follows: At Allahabad, there is a private college called "Kulbhaskar Ashram Agriculture Intermediate College". It is run by the "Kayastha Pathshala" which is a society registered under the Societies Registation Act. Rajendra Prasad, the common respondent in the appeals, was a Chemistry lecturer in that College. He was appointed on 15 July, 1952 in the scale of Rs. 175-10-215. On 20 June 1953, the management wrote to him stating that his services would not be required after 15 July 1963. It was indeed a termination letter. The respondent moved the Civil Court with suit No. 422/ 1953 for permanent injunction restraining management from interfering with his teaching work. The management resisted the suit inter alia, contending that the respondent was appointed only for one year. He was removed after the period of probation since his work was found to be unsatisfactory. It was also contended that no injunction could be granted for enforcement of the contract of personal service and the suit was not maintainable. On 20 May 1964, the Trial 'Court dismissed the suit as not maintainable. It was also held that the suit had become infructuous since the management had with drawn the impugned communication.
(3.) It seems that the management had withdrawn its earlier communication only to make another order. On 28 August 1964, the respondent was placed under suspension and he again approached the Civil Court for relief. He instituted suit No. 190 of 1964 in the Munsif Court seeking a declaration that the order of suspension was illegal. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the appeal therefrom, F.A. No. 583/1965, was allowed by the First Additional Civil Judge, Allahabad decreeing the suit as prayed for. That decision was affirmed by the High Court in Second Appeals No. 1111 of 1966. The High Court rendered the judgment on 9 April 1968.;