किसी कर्मचारी के निलंबन का अनुमोदन करने से पूर्व जिला विद्यालय निरीक्षक प्रबंध समिति से परामर्श के लिए बाध्य नहीं है कि किन्तु कर्मचारी के प्रत्यावेदन पर विचार करना आवश्यक

Case :­ WRIT ­ A No. ­ 909 of 2020
Petitioner :­ C/M Janta Inter College And Another
Respondent :­ State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :­ J.P.N. Singh
Counsel for Respondent :­ C.S.C.,Arvind Srivastava Iii
Hon’ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.

  1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing
    counsel for the State respondents and the learned counsel for the
    respondent no. 4.
  2. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the respondent no.
    4 is an Officiating Principal in Janta Inter College, Ahmadpur, Brahman,
    Saharanpur. From the averments made in paragraphs 4 & 5 of the writ
    petition, it appears that there are two rival groups in Committee of
    Management. One such group is led by the petitioner no. 2. It appears
    that a Writ-C No. 25966 of 2019 was filed by the Committee of
    Management in which an order dated 13.9.2019 was passed by this
    Court directing that the petitioners shall publish an election notification
    forthwith announcing the election programme and the District Inspector
    of Schools shall appoint an election observer whenever a demand is
    made by the petitioner and the election shall be held as per election
  3. In the aforenoted facts, it appears that the petitioners issued
    notices to the respondent No.4 dated 24.10.2019 and 24.10.2019
    followed by reminders dated 11.11.2019 and 26.11.2019 making
    allegations of misbehavior (indiscipline) and use of vulgar words against
    the Manager. The respondent no. 4 submitted a reply dated 24.10.2019
    denying the allegations and submitted that he made the request to the
  4. ………..……..

specifically provides for an opportunity of hearing at the subsequent
stage to the Management by the District Inspector of Schools while
considering to revoke an order of suspension passed under sub-section
(7) when the Inspector is satisfied that the disciplinary proceedings
against the head of the Institution or teacher, is being delayed for no fault
of the head of the Institution or the teacher.

  1. Undisputedly, the respondent No.3 has neither required the
    respondent No.4 to submit any objection nor any objection was
    submitted by the respondent No.4 before the respondent No.3 and as
    such in view of the law laid down by the Division Bench in the case of
    the Managing Committee, Dayanand Inter College, Gorakhpur
    (supra), the respondent No.4 has not committed any manifest error of
    law to pass the impugned order without affording opportunity of hearing
    to the Management and the respondent No.4.
  2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has not made any submission
    on merits of the impugned order and confined his submissions only on
    the point that the impugned order is violative of principles of natural
    justice as it has been passed without affording opportunity of hearing.
    His submission has been rejected by me for reasons stated in paragraphs
    above. Therefore, I do not find any good reason to interfere with the
    impugned order, in view of the position settled by the Division Bench of
    this court in the case of the Managing Committee, Dayanand Inter
    College, Gorakhpur (supra). However, to meet the ends of justice, it is
    directed that the petitioners/ Competent Authority shall conclude the
    disciplinary proceedings against the respondent No.4, in accordance with
    law, expeditiously preferably within two months if not completed so far,
    keeping in mind the time frame provided in Regulation 40.
  3. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed off.


Up Secondary Education Employee ,Who is working to permotion of education

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *