COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT Vs. DISTRICT BASIC SHIKSHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a writ petition filed by the Committee of Management, R.B.S. Purva Madhyamik Vidhyalaya, Lacchmanpur, Saraya, Basti, a recognised institution under the U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 against the order dated 25.4.1997, passed by the Assistant Director of Education (Basic), VII Region, Gorakhpur, asking the District Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Basti to reconsider the matter relating to the removal of Ram Dheeraj Singh, respondent no.3 from the post of Head Master and the order dated 12th June, 1997, passed by the District Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Basti refusing to grant the approval to the resolution of the Committee of Management by which Ram Dheeraj Singh was removed from the post of Head Master.

(2.) It appears that in the year 1996, the post of Head Master of the institution fell vacant. The petitioner published an advertisement on 2nd July, 1996, inviting the applications for the appointment on the post of Head Master. In pursuance thereof, Ram Dheeraj Singh, respondent no.3, applied, disclosing his academic qualifications, including having experience of three years of teaching as a Up Pradhan Adhyapak in an institution. He was called for interview on 30th July, 1996. On 30th July, 1996, the Selection Committee interviewed various applicants, including the respondent no.3. The respondent no.3 was placed at the first place in the merit list and one Ram Dhani Verma secured second position. The report of the Selection Committee was placed before the Committee of Management. The Committee of Management on 30th July, 1996, recommended name of respondent no.3 for appointment on the post of Head Master and sent all the papers to the respondent no.1 for approval. On 8th August, 1996, the respondent no.1 granted approval for appointment of respondent no.3 and he was appointed on 10th August, 1996 on probation for one year. The appointment letter is Annexure-3 to the writ petition.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that during the months of October and November, 1996, several complaints were received from the teaching staff against the respondent no.3 regarding indiscipline prevailing in the institution as well as misbehaviour of the respondent no.3 with the members of the staff. The petitioner, vide its letter dated 11th December, 1996, called for an explanation from the respondent no.3. The Manager of the institution also asked two members of the Committee of Management, namely, Rajendra Singh and Arjun Nath Pandey to enquire about the working of the respondent no.3 with reference to the complaints. The aforesaid two members submitted their report dated 21st December, 1996 in respect of the non-functioning of the institution properly and smoothly by the respondent no.3 and incapable of maintaining discipline amongst the teaching staff and the students as well as his misbehaviour with the teachers. It has also been stated in the report that the respondent no.3 remained absent from attending the institution for a number of days without any leave application or prior information to the Manager of the Institution inasmuch as the respondent no.3 remained absent on 13.11.1996, 14.11.1996, 18.11.1996, 20.11.1996 in the month of November and on 9.12.1996, 10.12.1996, 15.12.1996 to 23.12.1996, 27.12.1996 to 31.12.1996 in the month of December, 1996 without any leave application. Thereafter, the Manager of the Institution has given his report dated 21st December, 1996, which was placed before the Committee of Management on 22nd December, 1996.