AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ramesh Ranganathan, CJ
This Special Appeal is preferred against the order passed by learned Single Judge in WPMS No.1962 of 2019 dated 09.07.2019. The appellants herein had filed the said writ petition seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 06.07.2019; and for a direction to respondent no. 2 to appoint an Inquiry Officer to conduct the inquiry, as per letter dated 01.07.2019 issued by respondent no. 4, by another impartial officer.
Facts, to the limited extent necessary, are that the petitioners are all members of the General Body of the Committee of Management of the fifth respondent School being run in District Haridwar. The said institution, which has been admitted to grant in aid upto Intermediate level, is governed by the provisions of a duly approved scheme of administration.
On the allegation levelled by the appellants, regarding irregularities in the conduct of elections for membership of the said society, the third respondent is said to have directed the fourth respondent to conduct an enquiry on the complaints made by the petitioner, and other members of the society, on 26.06.2017. The fourth respondent was appointed as an Inquiry Officer, vide proceedings dated 22.06.2019, to inquire into allegations regarding finalisation of the membership of the society for participation in the elections.
Apprehending that the fourth respondent may not conduct an impartial inquiry, since he was the Block Education Officer of the very same Block in which the institution is located, the petitioners, along with nine others, submitted a representation to the Chief Education Officer on the very same day i.e. 22.06.2019 requesting him to appoint another person as an Inquiry Officer, instead of the Block Education Officer, Bhagwanpur. Acceding to their request, the Chief Education Officer, by his proceedings dated 05.07.2019, appointed the Block Education Officer Narsan as the Inquiry Officer.
On the very next day i.e. 06.07.2019, the said order dated 05.07.2019 was cancelled, resulting in the earlier Block Education Officer, Bhagwanpur continuing as the Inquiry Officer. No reasons are mentioned in the impugned order dated 06.07.2019 as to why the earlier order dated 05.07.2019 was cancelled.
While we may not be understood to have held that the Chief Education Officer was obligated to assign reasons for cancellation of the earlier order, we must also bear in mind that the very object, of having an impartial inquiry caused, would be defeated if the authorities keep changing their decisions repeatedly. If he has chosen to appoint another Inquiry Officer, on the representation submitted by the petitioner on 26.02.2019, the Chief Education Officer must have, at least, indicated why he chose to cancel the order on the very next date which, in effect, has resulted in the petitioners' request, for a change in the Inquiry Officer, being negatived.
While we would have, ordinarily, directed the Chief Education Officer to reconsider the matter, Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Committee of Management, would submit that the Committee has nothing to hide; and, with a view to avoid this unseemly controversy, a Senior Officer above the rank of Block Education Officer may be appointed to dispel any doubts about the impartiality of the inquiry.
As the dispute is, primarily, between the petitioners and the Committee of Management, suffice it, in such circumstances, to direct the Chief Education Officer to consider appointing an Officer, higher in rank than the Block Education Officer, to cause an inquiry into the matter. The order under appeal is modified to this limited extent, and the special appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Let a certified copy of this order be issued to the learned counsel for the parties, on payment of prescribed charges, by 19.07.2019.