DADDAN SINGH Vs. SRI DEVA NARAIN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ petition is directed against the order of termination dated 22-9-79 (Annexure 6) by which services of the petitioners have been terminated.

(2.) THE petitioners, namely, Daddan Singh, Ram Surat Maurya, Vijay Pal Shunkdhar, Surya Mani Tripathi and Bajrangi Ojha were working as Assistant Teachers employed by Dev Narain Singh (Junior) High School, Pakarpur, District Sultanpur. This institution was governed by Basic Education Act, 1972. It appears that in pursuance of the directions issued by the District Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Sultanpur, the institution terminated the services of the petitioners vide order dated 22-9-79 contained in annexure 6. Basic Shiksha Adhikari had issued orders for terminating the services of all other Assistant Teachers working in the institution excepting five Assistant Teachers, whose names are mentioned in the order dated 21-9-79 contained in annexure 5. This action was taken apparently because there was only one section in 6th, 7th and 8th class and as such it was considered that the teachers were in surplus and so their services were required to be terminated apparently in order to prevent-wasteful expenditure. THEse orders, contained in Annexures 5 and 6 have been challenged by the petitioners in this petition.

(3.) LEARNED counsel next contended that Basic Shiksha Adhikari had no jurisdiction to pass this order because this institution was already recognised as High School under the provisions of Section 7 of the Intermediate Education Act, 1972. His contention was that this institution was recognised by the Board. In para 11 of the Writ petition it has been averred that the Scheme of administration was approved under the Intermediate Education Act and recognition of High School was accorded by the Board. It was not mentioned on which date the approval was accorded by the Board. It was further not mentioned that the approval of the State Government to the recognition was also accorded. The reply to para 11 of the writ petition is contained in para 13 of the counter affidavit wherein it has been averred that contents of para 11 of the writ petition are not disputed. In further reply it is submitted that institution in question was recognised as High School by order dated 3-10-79 of the Secretary, U. P. Intermediate Board, Allahabad. A true copy of the recognition was annexed as annexure no. 1 which is dated 3-10-79. It was further averred that the recognition of the institution became effective only from the date the requirements regarding administration etc. as directed in the said order of recognition would be implemented by the said institution and approved by the U. P. Intermediate Education Board, Allahabad. In the rejoinder affidavit, it has been mentioned for the first time that recognition was granted on 21-8-79 and it was communicated to the opposite parties through telegram dated 21-8-79. Neithter in the writ petition nor in the rejoinder affidavit petitioners have averred that the State Government has accorded approval to the recognition which was given by the Board in exercise of power under sub-clause (4) of Section 7 of U. P. Intermediate Education Act. LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has urged that since the institution has not produced before this court the said telegram of its own, the same should be got summoned from the institution. The question of summoning the said telegram from the opposite parties would not aries in this case as we find that nowhere in the petition or in the rejoinder affidavit the aforesaid material fact has been averred that the State Government has approved the alleged recognition granted by the Board, under sub-clause (4) of Section 7. It would be relevant to quote Section 7 (A) which reads as follows :-