VIRENDER KUMAR GOEL Vs. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the petition is taken up-for final disposal.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 7.2.97 passed by respondent no.3 suspending the petitioner in view of the allegations against the petitioner of leakage of question papers. After the memorandum to hold the enquiry was issued on 11.4.97, respondents 2 and 3 addressed letter dated 10.3.198 to respondent no.1 requesting to provide a nominee to constitute the disciplinary authority committee as per rule 118 of the Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973. Though this was the correct procedure. Learned counsel for the respondent states that respondent no.1 failed to nominate any person and as a consequence thereof the enquiry proceedings did not continue. Learned counsel for the respondent has further drawn my attention to a letter dated 1.11.96 addressed by the petitioner to respondent no.3 admitting to his guilt.

(3.) Be that as it may the enquiry must be taken to its logical conclusion and a finding must be arrived at while taking into consideration whatever admission may have been made by the petitioner.