RAM BIHARI DIXIT Vs. ASHOK KUMAR SHUKLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, Ram Bihari Dixit, has appeared in the Court in person. He submits that he has withdrawn his instruction from his counsels and that he shall argue the matter himself.

(2.) Heard the Petitioner in person, Sri A.K. Mehrotra, learned Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 and learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No. 4.

(3.) Petitioner filed original suit No. 1989 of 1987 for prohibitory injunction restraining the Principal, Khalsa High Secondary School, Govind Nagar and others from interfering in the working of the Petitioner as Assistant Teacher in the said institution. Copy of the plaint filed by the Plaintiff/Petitioner has been brought on record as Annexure-CA-1 to the counter-affidavit. This Court finds that in the plaint allegation, it has been stated that the Petitioner was a teacher in the said institution when it was a recognized junior high school. Subsequently, the institution was upgraded as a Higher Secondary School. The Petitioner/ because of such up-gradation, claims that the became the teacher of the upgraded high school. It was stated that Petitioner was not paid his full salary and only a meager amount was paid. On 16th April, 1968, the Manager and the President of the institution prohibited the Plaintiff/Petitioner from discharging his duties in the school. Petitioner, therefore, made an application before the District Inspector of Schools, Kanpur. He also filed an appeal before the District Inspector of Schools in August, 1969, Which was not decided (reference paragraph-6 of the plaint). Petitioner in paragraph-8 of the writ petition states that he was assured by the Principal of Khalsa Higher Secondary School and General Secretary of Shri Guru Singh Sabha that his case will be decided in due course, but no action has been taken, he is not being permitted to enter the institution. In paragraph-10 it has been stated that Plaintiff-Petitioner has Suffered mentally and physically due to unemployment. In paragraph-11-A, it has been stated that the Plaintiff is still in service of the said institution, as his services have not been terminated or removed in accordance with law. Verbal Order of termination is no order. In paragraph- 11-B it has been stated that Khalsa Higher Secondary is an minority institution and the Defendants are enjoying an illegal backing of the District Inspector of Schools, Kanpur Nagar and the Deputy Director of Education, IV Region, Allahabad. Cause for filing of the suit has been disclosed as 20th October, 1984 and 15th November, 1986. The relief prayed for in the said suit are as follows: