JAI PRAKASH MUDLIAR Vs. A C CHOUBEY PRESIDENT GOVERNING BODY PT JAWAHARLAL NEHRU SCIENCE AND ARTS COLLEGE BEMETARA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, a former Principal of the Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru Science and Arts College, Bemetara, challenges the resolutions of the Governing Body, dated 28-10-1971 (Petitioner's Annexures -L and N) terminating his services with effect from 21-8-1971. At this stage it may be relevant to reproduce the exact wording of the resolution, which is as follows:-

(2.) THE facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition lie within a narrow compass: They are as follows: On 2-7-1969 the petitioner joined as Principal of Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru Science and Arts College, Bemetara. By a resolution, dated 15-7 69 (Petitioner's Annexure -A) the petitioner was appointed Principal on probation for a period of two years with effect from 1-7-1969. As such, the probationary period was to end on 1-7-197 1. A formal order in that behalf was passed on 31-7-1969 (Petitioner's Annexure-B) appointing him on a pay-scale of Rs. 850-25 950-30-1100, in addition to the nearness allowance admissible under the Rules applicable to the Government servants. The order also stated that the appointment was subject to the approval of the executive Council of the Ravishankar University.

(3.) THE petitioner applied for leave from 21-8-1971 to 31-8-1971. He did not join immediately, but resumed his duty on 25-9-1971. However, that leave was refused and by order, dated 11-10-1971 (Petitioner's Annexures-D and G), he was asked to deposit donations receipt-books and to render an account of the donations received. Thereafter a show-cause notice, dated 2-10-1971 (Petitioner's Annexure-E) was given to the petitioner to show cause as to why his services should not be dispensed with. The allegations made in the notice were that 'the petitioner failed to properly conduct, supervise and control the elections of Students Union, which ultimately was dissolved in both the years and the petitioner chose to nominate the members of the Union. As a result of dissolution of the Union and nominations, dissatisfaction spread amongst the students resulting in agitation. The members of the staff expressed resentment against the petitioner. An explanation was sought from the petitioner, but he failed to offer any. In the current session also the petitioner was absent from the headquarter from the start of the academic session except for a week. The petitioner failed to give and maintain proper accounts of the donations and Lottery tickets. The petitioner did not join in proper time, even though leave was refused. The petitioner during that period was quite hale and hearty and he had deliberately avoided to join his duty. As such, he had acted to the detriment of the interest and welfare of the Institution in the matter of management, disbursement of pay and other routine matters of management, including education.