COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT FAIZ-E-AM INTER COLLEGE NAGLA MEWATI TAJGANJ AGRA Vs. DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS AGRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) V. M. Sahai, J. This Writ Petition has been filed by Committee of Manage ment. Faiz-e-Am Inter College. Nagla Mewati, Tajganj, Agra (in brief institu tion) and its manager challenging "the order dated 1-6-2000 passed by District Inspector of Schools setting aside the or ders dated 22-5-1997 and 19-7-1997 suspending and terminating respondent No. 2 Fauran Singh who was working as Principal of the institution since 1984.

(2.) THE institution was granted tem porary and permanent recognition as junior high school on 1-7-1984 and 13-8-1986 respectively. It was upgraded to high school on 5-12-1990. On 13- 3-1995 it was recognised as minority institution. It was upgraded to intermediate level by order dated 26-11-1996. But it did not receive any grant-in-aid from the Government. THE petitioners appointed an enquiry committee for holding preliminary en quiry against respondent No. 2 for misap propriation of Rs. 15,992/ -. THE Commit tee submitted its report on 15-5-1997. It was of the opinion that respondent No. 2 misappropriated a sum of Rs. 15,992/ -. In the meeting on 22-5-1997 the petitioners resolved to suspend the respondent No. 2 and appointed a committee to enquire into the charges. THE suspension order was challenged by respondent No. 2 by means of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 22761 of 1997. This petition was dismissed on 16-7-1997 with observation that since the respondent No. 2 has made a repre sentation before District Inspector of Schools he may decide whether suspen sion of respondent No. 2 was in accord ance with Section 16-G (7) of U. P. Inter mediate Education Act as it was a recog nised institution. This judgment was served by the respondent No. 2 in the of fice of respondent No. 1. THE committee of management terminated the services of respondent No. 2by order dated 19-7- 1997 on the basis of the report of the enquiry committee. THE respondent no. 2 neither appeared nor filed any reply before the enquiry committee. He was found to have misappropriated sum of Rs. 15,992/ -. THE petitioner issued show- cause notice to the respondent No. 2 but since no reply was given nor he appeared, the services of the respondent No. 2 were terminated by order dated 19-7-1997. THE order was sent by the petitioners to respondent No. 1 for obtaining approval of the commis sion/board.

(3.) THE main submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the institution being a minority institution the provisions of Section 16 (G) (3) (a) of the U. P. Intermediate Education Act did not apply. THE learned counsel further sub mitted that in any case the institution does not receive any grant-in-aid from the Government, therefore, the order terminat ing the services of respondent No. 2 became final and the District Inspector of Schools could not set-aside it. It was lastly urged that the District Inspector of Schools should have forwarded the termination order to commission/board for approval and he could not consider its validity.