RAMADOSS K Vs. COMMISSIONER VIZIANAGARAM MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a teacher in municipal high school, Vizianagaram, and seeks to vacate an order by the commissioner of the Vizianagaram municipality of May 1951. The petitioner further seeks to quash two other orders that are of 3 October 1955 and 11 August 1956. These have dismissed his appeals against the main order, the earlier being by the Government, and the latter by the Governor.

(2.) THE several facts in support of the prayer for certiorari are contained in the affidavit accompanying the petition. It states that the petitioner was promoted as the headmaster of the municipal high school, Kaspa, by the commissioner through his order dated 2 May 1949; and on 9 May 1951 the commissioner passed another order reverting him as assistant. The order was without any notice to show cause and in violation of the statutory rules relating to the appointment and punishment of officers and servants of the municipal council. Other relevant facts are that as one Sanjeeva Rao, who had been appointed to fill in the office by the same order, had declined to accept the post and also another person who was the headmaster of the municipal middle school. The commissioner through another order of 5 June 1951 appointed the writ petitioner as a headmaster with effect from 29 May 1951. The appeal to the Government was filed on 6 August 1951 but was not disposed of till 3 October 1955 on which date it was rejected.

(3.) IN between the aforesaid two main orders, the commissioner on 25 September 1954 issued memorandum requiring the writ petitioner to pass the Account Test in the next examination, failing which the petitioner was to be reverted under the relevant rule, and he appears to have passed the examination in June 1955. Between the aforesaid two dates, certain other orders were passed by the municipal commissioner, which the petitioner has not asked to be vacated, but has referred to perhaps with a view to show the arbitrary manner in which the appointing authority have proceeded against the petitioner. One of such orders is of 3 December 1954, whereby the commissioner had directed the petitioner's appointment from 29 May to 17 June 1951 to be without right of promotion. Another is of 30 April 1955, reverting the writ petitioner on the ground of his failure to pass the examination; but that was not given effect to because of a direction by the Government not to revert headmasters on the ground of their not passing the Account Test. The third of such orders is of 21 March 1956, and thereby the writ petitioner's probation was started afresh from 28 June 1955 treating his earlier services as one under emergency provisions, and he was at the same time directed to return Rs. 88-5-0. These orders were passed before the petitioner's appeal to the Governor against the main order was rejected, which was on 11 August 1956. Thereafter this writ petition had been filed.