MITHAILAL DALSINGHAR SINGH Vs. S V JOAG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are the President and the Secretary respectively of Arya Samaj, Matunga, Bombay 19. The said Arya Samaj inter alia conducts a secondary school known as "Shri Dayanand Balak Vidyalaya" at Matunga. Respondent No. 2 was the Principal of the said school and was found to be guilty of certain charges by an Inquiry Committee, Respondent No. 2 appealed under Rule 77 of the Secondary Schools Code of the Government of Maharashtra to respondent No. 1 the Deputy Director of Education, Greater Bombay, who by his order dated March 28, 1972 ordered respondent No. 2 to be reinstated. The petition has been filed for a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing- the said order. The facts leading to this petition are briefly as follows:

(2.) On April 24, 1971 the Management of the School (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as "the Management") issued to respondent No. 2 a show cause notice containing three charges against him viz. (a) that he had promoted a student by name Jaiprakash Singh from Standard X to Standard XI by manipulation of mark sheets of the examination held in April 1970 (b) that he had issued two false certificates (i) School Leaving Certificate issued to the said Jaiprakash Singh and (ii) Certificate regarding residence to Ramnihore Jagdish Narayan Shukla, and (c) that he had drawn house rent allowance illegally and improperly. Respondent No. 2 submitted an explanation dated April 29, 1971. Thereafter an Inquiry Committee consisting of three persons was constituted, two nominated by the Management and the third by respondent No. 2. The inquiry was under Rule 77 of the Secondary Schools Code. On July 2, 1971 the Inquiry Committee charge-sheeted respondent No. 2. On July 14, 1971 respondent No. 2 submitted his explanation to the charge-sheet. After the inquiry was completed respondent No. 2 was found guilty of all the charges and the Inquiry Committee held on January 29, 1972 that respondent No. 2 be dismissed from service.

(3.) On February 15, 1972 respondent No. 2 preferred an appeal under Rule 77 of the Secondary Schools Code to respondent No. 1. On March 3, 1972 respondent No. 2 wrote to the Management his letter exh. F to the petition enclosing a copy of the appeal and requiring tie Management to send to respondent No. 1 the remarks of the Management thereon if any, summary of the datewise proceedings of the Inquiry Committee's meetings, copy of the resolution deciding to suspend respondent No. 2 and result sheet of the Annual Examination of the Standard X held in April 1970. It must be pointed out that this letter does not call for the proceedings of the Inquiry Committee. On March 13, 1972 the Management replied by the letter exh. G to the petition sending the summary of the proceedings and other documents required in the letter of March 3, 1972, except the remarks of the Management on the appeal. It was stated that the remarks would be sent after the Management studied the said appeal. It must also be mentioned that the summary of the proceedings was merely the diary of the proceedings and did not contain the evidence or the substance of the evidence recorded by the Inquiry Committee. On March 14, 1972 respondent No. 1 wrote to the Management fixing March 20, 1972 at. 4.00 p.m. for the hearing of the matter.