Radhe Shyam vs District Inspector of Schools and Others

Bharati Sapru, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by on order passed by the District Inspector of Schools doled 16.6.1986 in second appeal by which he has confirmed the order of dismissal dated 11.3.1985 passed against the petitioner and also the order passed in the first appeal by the management by which his dismissal was confirmed.

The facts are that the petitioner is a class 4th employee and was suspended by an order dated 13.12.1984 for two charges that is for not doing night duties of which he was supposed to do. In his reply the petitioner stales that he Could not do the night duty on account of certain family problems. The management, however, dismissed him. The petitioner filed an appeal. The appeal of the petitioner too was dismissed. The petitioner has taken several grounds before the management to show that before passing of the dismissal order he was not given adequate opportunity to defend himself. Against the order passed in the first appeal the petitioner filed a second appeal before the District Inspector of Schools and in the second appeal the petitioner had also taken eight grounds.

I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent and also perused the material on record.

The order of the District Inspector of Schools dated 16.6.1986 contains no discussion with regard to ground Nos. 1 to 7 as given by the petitioner but simply says that he should have agitated this before the first appellate authority and because he did not do so, the District Inspector of Schools would not go into this matter.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner has extraneously urged that he pursued the matter both before the, first appellate authority and before the second appellate authority vigorously but no heed was paid to him. The order of the District Inspector of Schools dated 16.6.1986 contains no reason for confirming the order of the first appellate authority but it has simply, blindly followed the order of the first appellate authority. The matter is, therefore, remanded to the District Inspector of Schools to decide the matter on merits by giving a reasoned and speaking order after giving to the petitioner full and fair opportunity of defending himself.

Till decision, the petitioner will continue to work as he has done so. The matter on remand will be decided by the District Inspector of Schools within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. The order dated 16.6.1986 is set aside.

The writ petition is allowed.