ROOP CHAND CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was selected in the year 1999 for the post of Principal by the U.P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board and, in pursuance thereof, the petitioner joined the post of Principal in the institution concerned. On 30.5.2002, a charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner and was simultaneously placed under suspension. Subsequently by an order dated 22.7.2002, the District Inspector of Schools revoked the suspension order and allowed the petitioner to discharge the duties of the post of Principal. In November 2002, the petitioner was placed again under suspension and a second charge-sheet was issued. It transpires that on the basis of an inquiry report, the Committee of Management passed a resolution dated 25.1.2003 proposing to dismiss the petitioner from the service. By another order dated 25.1.2003, the District Inspector of Schools revoked the suspension order against which the Committee of Management filed Writ Petition No. 7356 of 2003 which was allowed by judgment dated 19.2,2003 holding that the District Inspector of Schools had no jurisdiction to pass an order and remanded the matter back for reconsideration. The Court however, restrained the petitioner from functioning as the Principal till the disposal of the matter. The District Inspector of Schools by an order dated 28.3.2003 disapproved the order of suspension, against which the Committee of Management filed Writ Petition No. 16307 of 2003. This writ petition was dismissed by a judgment dated 17.4.2003. A Special Appeal No. 339 of 2003 was filed which was disposed of directing the Selection Board to take a decision in the matter of the proposed punishment. The Court further directed that the order of suspension would remain in operation for a period of two months. Since the Board did not take action within six weeks, the District Inspector of Schools by an order dated 9.7.2003 directed the reinstatement of the petitioner. Subsequently, the District Inspector of Schools by an order dated 7.10.2003 revoked his earlier order dated 9.7.2003. The petitioner filed writ petition No. 47583 of 2003 in which an interim order dated 28.10.2003 was issued staying the operation of the order dated 7.10.2003 passed by the District Inspector of Schools. Since November 2003, the petitioner is consequently working as the Principal and is discharging his duties. It has also come on record that the petitioner would retire on 30.6.2007.

(2.) The Selection Board by an order dated 18.5.2006 found that the charges leveled against the petitioner stood proved but in its wisdom did not approve the recommendation of the Committee of Management for the dismissal of the petitioner and, directed on humanitarian ground, to permit the petitioner to function as the Principal but divested the financial and administrative powers. The said order of the Board was communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 26.5.2005. Aggrieved by the order of the Board, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

(3.) Heard Sri Ashok Khare, the learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Sunil Kumar Srivastava, Advocate, for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 4, Sri R. P. Dubey for respondent No. 2 and Sri A.B.Saran, senior counsel for respondent No. 5.