NIRANJAN PAL DIXIT Vs. DISTRICT BASIC SHIKSHA ADHIKARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in July, 1966 is Sri Gandhi Junior High School, Sahawar, district Etah. He continued in service as such when on 6,4.1.985, after nearly two decades, he was placed under suspension on the charge that he had submitted a forged mark-sheet at the time of seeking appointment as Assistant Teacher. The charge-sheet was submitted by the Committee of Management respondent No. 3 to which reply was also given by the petitioner. The Committee of Management thereafter recommended to the Basic Shiksha Adhikari that the services of the petitioner may be terminated. The Basic Shiksha Adhikari conducted a detailed enquiry requiring the Committee of Management as well as the petitioner to produce the documents in support of their respective cases, which were submitted by them. The Basic Shiksha Adhikari, not being satisfied with the case of the management, vide its order dated 10.2.1987, refused to grant approval for termination of the services of the petitioner. It has been clearly mentioned in the said order, that the request for grant of approval for terminating the services of the petitioner was turned down as the management has not been able to prove the charges against the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner was allowed to continue to work as teacher in the school of respondent No. 3. Even after passing of the said order, the petitioner was not taken back in the school of respondent No. 3 nor was he allowed to work. The petitioner, therefore, made a representation to the District Basic Shiksha Adhikari, who to turn on 27.3.1987, directed the Committee of Management to take steps for payment of salary to the petitioner, and on 10.11.1987 the Accounts Officer of the Basic Shiksha Adhikari ultimately directed the Management to take steps for payment of salary or else the order of single operation would be passed. The respondents still did not pay the salary to the petitioner, and instead, the Committee of Management sent a letter to the petitioner on 5.1.1988 informing him that his services had been terminated, for which the approval had been granted by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari vide orders dated 24.12.1987/4.1.1988, which have been filed as Annexure-12 to this writ petition.

(2.) The petitioner thus, filed this writ petition praying for quashing the aforesaid orders of the Committee of Management and the Basic Shiksha Adhikari and also for a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to work as teacher in the school and to pay his salary.

(3.) In the counter-affidavit of the respondent No. 3 the Committee of Management, a detailed order dated 24.12.1987 of the officiating Basic Shiksha Adhikari has been filed as Annexure-C.A.-9 which is practically an order passed reviewing the earlier order dated 10.2.1987 by which the Basic Shiksha Adhikari had refused to grant approval for termination of the services of the petitioner. In the said order it has been mentioned that against the order dated 10.2.1987, the Committee of Management has already preferred an appeal before the Secretary, U. P. Basic Shiksha Parishad, Allahabad, which makes it clear that although the order dated 10.2.1987 had already been challenged in appeal, still the Basic Shiksha Adhikari proceeded to review the earlier order passed by his predecessor.