ORDER : S. Saghir Ahmad, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court dated 27-11-1980 whereunder the writ petition filed by the appellant has been allowed in part. The appellant was appointed as a teacher in a Junior School initially on 1-4-1974 and, thereafter, for different tenures, the last one being for the tenure 1-7-1977 till 30-6-1978. When the academic session began in July 1978, the appellant went to join the School but as he was not allowed to join then he made a complaint before the District Basic Education Officer. The Basic Education Officer appears to have given a direction to the appellant to go and join the School in October 1978 but notwithstanding the said direction as the appellant was not permitted to join the School, he approached the High Court. In the High Court, the Committee of Management took a stand that the services of the appellant stood terminated on 31-5-1978 for non-compliance with several directions given by the management. The High Court on consideration of the relevant provisions of the Rules, came to the conclusion that the order of termination alleged to have been made on 31-5-1978 is invalid inasmuch as the prior approval of the competent authority has not been obtained. But having come to the aforesaid conclusion while granting relief, the High Court has said that the period of appointment of the appellant being only up to 30-6-1978, the appellant would be entitled to the salary till that date and he has no right to the post and, therefore, the appellant cannot be directed to be reinstated. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant in this Court urged that since the posts were available and the appellant has been given appointment though on tenure basis for different periods right from 1974, the appellant should have been allowed to continue in the post. We are unable to persuade ourselves to accept this contention. In view of the fixed tenure appointment of the appellant which stood lapsed on the last date of the tenure indicated in the letter of appointment, that is 30-6-1978, on the terms and conditions of the letter of appointment, no right accrues in favour of the appellant to be continued in service beyond 30-6-1978. In view of the fixed tenure appointment of the appellant which stood lapsed on the last date of the tenure indicated in the letter of appointment, that is 30-6-1978, on the terms and conditions of the letter of appointment, no right accrues in favour of the appellant to be continued in service beyond 30-6-1978. The High Court was, therefore, fully justified in directing that the appellant would be entitled to salary from 31-5-1978 till 30-6-1978. We see no infirmity with the judgment of the High Court to be interfered with by us in this appeal. 3. The appeal, accordingly, fails and is dismissed, but no costs. Appeal dismissed.