COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT, MAHARANI RAJA RAM GIRLS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, DARSHANPURWA, KANPUR AND ANOTHER Vs. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION (BASIC), U. P. ALLAHABAD AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution attacks the validity of the order dated 5th Oct., 1974 whereby the Deputy Director of Education allowed a joint appeal filed by the respondents Nos. 4 and 5. A true copy of the said, order is Annexure 6 to the writ petition.

(2.) The facts, in brief, are these The petitioner no. 2 is a registered society registered under the Societies Registration Act No. 21 of 186t, and it runs an educational institution known as Maharani Raja Ram Girls Higher Secondary School, Darshanpurwa, Kanpur. The petitioner no. 1 is the Committee of Management of the said institution. The institution has an approved scheme of administration. The respondents Nos. 4 and 5 were appointed or- the post of Assistant Teachers in the said institution as probationers from 8th July, 1973 to 30th June, 1974. On 24th March, 1974 the Committee of Management at its meeting decided that the said respondents should not be confirmed on the posts held by them and, therefore, a resolution was passed for obtaining the approval of the respondent no. 3 for terminating the services of the said respondents. The permission so sought from the respondent no, 3 was granted by the said officer by an order dated 18th May, 1974. Thereafter, the Committee of Management by its resolution No. 5 passed in its meeting held on 9th May, 1974 decided to terminate the services of the respondents nos. 4 and 5 after giving them one month's notice The true copy of the said resolution No. 5 has been annexed to the petition and marked as Anaexure 3. On the basis of the said resolution, the notice dated 20th May, 1974 was served upon the said respondents. Thereafter, the said respondents filed an appeal before the respondent no. 2 who is the Deputy Director of Education (Women) U. P. Allahabad. The said appeal was allowed by the said respondent by her order dated 5th Oct., 1974, a true copy whereof is Annexure 6 to the petition. Inter alia, the petitioners have questioned the validity of the order whereby the appeal was allowed by the respondent no. 2 on the ground that no opportunity was afforded to the petitioners to make their submissions in the appeal and the same was allowed ex parte and at the back of the petitioners. There are other grounds of attack also but it is not necessary to deal with them since in our opinion, the aforesaid contention made on behalf of the petitioners is well founded. There can be no dispute that before the appeal was heard and decided by the respondent no 2, she was bound to intimate the petitioners about the filing of the said appeal and a date should have been fixed for the hearing of the appeal and an intimation thereof should have been given to the petitioners. Admittedly, from the record it is clear that all this was not done in the instant case.

(3.) Accordingly, we allow this writ petition and quash the order dated 5th Oct., 1974 (Annexure 6 to the writ petition) and direct that the joint appeal filed by the respondents nos. 4 and 5 shall be heard and disposed of after due notice and intimation to the petitioners and after affording them an opportunity to contest the appeal. In the circumstances, there will be no order as to costs. We direct that the aforesaid departmental appeal shall be heard and disposed of as expeditiously as possible. Petition allowed.