COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT UCHATTAR MADHYAMIK VIDYALAYA AKORDI JALAUN Vs. U P SECONDARY EDUCATION SERVICE COMMISSION ALLAHABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This writ petition is on behalf of committee of management, who is running educational institution, namely, Uchhattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, which is governed by the provisions of U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Regional Selection Boards Act of 1982, hereinafter referred to as the Commission Act. By means of present writ petition, the relief for quashing the order of Commission dated 12/18th April, 1991, filed as Annexure-6 to the writ petition has been prayed for.

(2.) RESPONDENT No. 3 Sri Jugal Kishore Verma was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the aforesaid institution and was granted L.T. grade pay scale. He, according to the petitioners fabricated entries in his service record as also the orders of the District Inspector of Schools and claimed to be a permanent Principal of the High School as in the meantime, the institution was upgraded from Junior High School to High School. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against respondent No. 3 by framing eight charges on the ground of fabrication of record and misappropriation of funds. A copy of the charge-sheet has been filed as Annexure-3 to the writ petition. The charges are to the effect that respondent No. 3 is guilty of embezzlement of money, as well as fabrication of service records and other documents. A copy of the charge-sheet was served by registered post on 16th August, 1988, asking him to submit a reply in writing within three weeks as also produce the evidence in support thereof and inform, if he wants to cross-examine any person he may indicate it. A notice by publication in a newspaper Dainik Karm Yug Prakash, dated September 11, 1988 was also published informing respondent No. 3 that through the registered letter dated 16th August, 1988, a reply was called for within a period of three weeks which is still awaited. Through this notice published in the news paper it was also made known that reply may be given by 18th December, 1988 positively and on 21st December, 1988, respondent No. 3 may present himself before the Committee of Management as its meeting is scheduled on that date at 10.00 a.m. in the school premises. RESPONDENT No. 3 neither appeared nor was there any reply to the charges levelled against him and the Committee of Management in its meeting held on 21st of August, 1988 resolved to terminate the services of respondent No. 3. All the relevant documents were submitted to the U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission, (hereinafter called as Commission) for its approval under Section 21 of the U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission and the Regional Selection Board Act, 1982 through the agency of the District Inspector of Schools. The Commission fixed 2nd April, 1991 for hearing of the petitioner and 3rd April, 1991 for the personal hearing of respondent No. 3. The Commission although found that respondent No. 3 is guilty of charge Nos. 1, 2, 5 and 8, but disapproved the resolution of the Committee of Management, dismissing the services of respondent No. 3 by the impugned order, on the ground that Regulation 37 has been violated by the petitioner.

(3.) I have given careful consideration to the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. It is not in dispute that out of eight charges levelled against respondent No. 3, the Commission found after affording opportunity of hearing to respondent No. 3 that charge Nos. 1, 2, 5 and 8 stand proved.