MAHMOOD ALAM Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner though filed this writ application for grant of various reliefs but by an order dated 24-8-94 he restricted his prayer only in regard to paragraph 1 (a) of the writ application. Relief, as prayed for, in paragraph l(a) reads thus: -

(2.) It appears that by an order dated 21-12-92 the Managing Committee of the School (respondent No. 5) dismissed the services of the petitioner after holding a departmental proceeding. It is not in dispute that the school in question is a primary school managed and governed by the minority community. Minority status of the school was recognised by the Government as far back as in 1978. The petitioner was directed to show cause, to which he replied, but not being satisfied, the respondent No. 5 put him under suspension on 7-3-93. Against that order the petitioner approached the District Superintendent of Education, Jamshedpur, who stayed the order of suspension. Against this interference by the DSE the respondent No. 5 moved this Court in CWJC No. 1153/93 (R) which was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court on 15-4-93, inter alia, observing as follows: -

(3.) Thereafter, Additional Director of Education directed the DSE on 31-3- 93 not to take any decision with regard to the action taken by the respondent No. 5. Subsequently, the petitioner himself moved this Court in CWJC No. 1615/93 (R) challenging the order of suspension dated 7-3-93. He also impugned the aforesaid order of the Additional Director of Education asking the DSE not to interfere with the decision taken by the respondent No. 5. At the stage of argument of the said application before the Division Bench on 12-7- 93, Counsel for the petitioner withdrew the same. Again when the Additional Director of Education passed the final order justifying the suspension of the petitioner by respondent No. 5, the petitioner again approached this Court in CWJC No. 3869/93 (R) but as by that time the petitioner was dismissed by the respondent No. 5 through the impugned order, the writ application was withdrawn by the petitioner as it had become infructuous. Admittedly, the petitioner filed a Title Suit No. 129/93 making Managing Committee and its other members as defendants, wherein, inter alia, the petitioner prayed for the following relief: -