SHANTI SWAROOP MAHAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . (Oral) 1. A belated counter affidavit has been filed by the State, which though has been kept with the record, but no cognizance thereon has been taken.

(2.) VIRENDRA Singh Mahar was, at the relevant time, the Principal of the College. In Writ Petition (M/S) No. 925 of 2005, Pareshwar Prasad Bhatt complained that Virendra Singh Mahar is withdrawing salaries of an This Court, by an order dated 26th Assistant Teacher fraudulently. October, 2005, directed a report in respect of such allegation to be filed. Such a report was filed, when it was reported that Smt. Sarita Pundir, D/o Virendra Singh Mahar was appointed as Assistant Teacher and she was drawing salaries and such salaries were being deposited in her account directly and, accordingly, the allegation that Virendra Singh Mahar was withdrawing the salaries payable to one Assistant Teacher is untrue. The report to that extent was accepted by the writ court by an order passed on 22nd April, 2006, which has reached its finality.

(3.) THE basic contention is this that, on the basis of the report referred to above and accepted by this Court, the purported crime has been exonerated. I am unable to accept the same, inasmuch as, the Court directed a report to be filed in relation to the allegation whether Virendra Singh Mahar is usurping salaries payable to an Assistant Teacher in the name of Smt. Sarita Pundir or not. That had nothing to do with an appointment to be given to Smt. Sarita Pundir contrary to law in order to enable withdrawal of salary payable to an Assistant Teacher.