AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Abhinava Upadhya, J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner claims himself to be the Committee of Management being in effective control of the institution.
According to it, it passed a resolution dated 01.02.2009 to suspend the Principal of the institution on charges of indiscipline, insubordination, dereliction of duties and financial irregularities and the resolution duly signed by the Manager has been forwarded to the District Inspectors of Schools vide letter dated 02.02.2009 which was received in the office of DIOS on 03.02.2009.
The grievance of the petitioner is that till date no decision has been taken and the order of suspension after expiry of 60 days will seize to be effective for operation in terms of Section 16G(7) of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The petitioner also relies upon a full Bench decision of this Court in the case of Chandra Bhushan Mishra Versus DIOS and others reported in 1995 1 UPLBEC 460, wherein this Court has held that after lapse of 60 days the suspension order may not be operative but it does continue to exist and it does not get obliterated after a lapse of 60 days and the DIOS can or rather has to pass some order either approving or disapproving the said resolution of the Committee of Management.
As stated above if the petitioner is in effective control of the institution and the suspension order has been passed in accordance with law, the DIOS has to pass appropriate orders on the said suspension order pending before him in accordance with law.
Pup up this case on 08.04.2009 as fresh.
Learned standing counsel, in the meantime will seek instructions in the matter as to why the DIOS is not proceeding by either approving or disapproving the suspension order passed upon the resolution of the Committee of Management forwarded to it under the signatures of Manager vide resolution dated 01/02.02.2009.