Hari Krishna Singh Yadav vs Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Etawah and others

Sanjay Misra, J.—Heard Sri Irshad Ali learned Counsel for the petitioner learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sri S.K. Misra for respondent No. 4.

This writ petition is directed against a suspension order dated 12.4.1999 whereby the petitioner who was appointed as headmaster of the Janta Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Baharpur (Bharthana), District Etawah has been suspended in contemplation of an enquiry. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner was duly selected by the Committee constituted by the District Basic Education Officer, Etawah and was given appointment as headmaster of the school by the letter dated 10.5.1996 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition) and he joined his duties as such. According to him the petitioner was regularised in service after expiry of the probation period. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states there was a dispute between two rival Committee of Management one claiming to the under Managership of Sri Badan Singh and the other claiming under the Managership of Sri Banshidhar. The Committee of Management claiming to be functioning under the Managership of Sri Banshidhar has passed the impugned suspension order which is under challenge in this writ petition.

The contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that in the election dispute between the aforesaid two rival Committee of Management Sri Banshidhar was given recognition by the authorities vide order dated 12.8.1998 and the rival Committee of Management of Sri Badan Singh filed a Writ Petition No. 28652 of 1998 wherein by an interim order dated 10.9.1998 (Annexure 9) this Court stayed the functioning of the Committee of Management of Sri Banshidhar and stayed the operation of the order dated 12.8.1998 recognising the Committee of Management of Sri Banshidhar. According to him when the interim order was passed Sri Banshidhar could not function further as Manager of the Committee of Management of the institution and consequently could not pass the suspension order dated 12.4.1999 suspending the petitioner pending an enquiry. Learned Counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that the aforesaid Writ Petition No. 28652 of 1998 was dismissed for nonprosecution by the order dated 7.7.2000 which is available as Annexure SCA1 to the supplementary affidavit.

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 4 has contested the submission made on behalf of the petitioner but has not denied the passing of the interim order dated 10.9.1998 in Writ Petition No. 28652 of 1998. According to him irrespective of passing of the interim order the Committee of Management headed by Sri Badan Singh was never recognised by the authorities and never functioned during the aforesaid period and hence according to him the Committee of Management of Sri Banshidhar was continuing to have effective control over the Management and hence the passing of the impugned suspension order cannot be said to be illegal or without jurisdiction in any manner whatsoever.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner has stated that when there was an interim order staying recognition the order dated 12.8.1998 of Committee of Management of Sri Banshidhar at that time the salary of the petitioner as also the other teachers was paid by an order of single operation of account and therefore it cannot be said that either Sri Badan Singh or Sri Banshidhar were in effective control of the Management of the institution for the purpose of payment of salary to the teachers and other staff. He, therefore, states that when the single operation of account was ordered then the Committee of Management of Sri Banshidhar was admittedly not functioning atleast for the purpose of payment of salary.

Having considered the submission of learned Counsel for the parties the undisputed fact in this writ petition is that the impugned order of suspension has been passed by the Committee of Management claimed to be managed by Sri Banshidhar. Against the recognition of Committee of Management managed by Sri Banshidhar this Court had passed an interim order on 10.9.1998 and therefore the said Committee of Management of Sri Banshidhar could not legally function. The interim order was admittedly vacated on 7.7.2000 when the writ petition was dismissed in default. However the suspension order had been passed on 12.4.1999 that is much prior to the dismissal of the writ petition for nonprosecution. It is also not denied that the salary of the teachers and other staff during the aforesaid period was paid by the authorities under an order of single operation of the account. Consequently when this Court in this writ petition cannot go into the dispute of the rival Committee" of Management it can very safely be recorded on the basis of the record that neither the Committee of Management of Sri Banshidhar nor the Committee of Management of Sri Badan Singh was in effective control for the purpose of payment of salary of the teachers and other staff of the institution under the payment of Salaries Act. However that be a circumstance to hold that on the date when the impugned order was passed by the Committee of Management of Sri Banshidhar there was as interim order operating against them and the salary was being paid by an order of single operation.

When this writ petition was filed an interim order dated 24.5.1999 had been passed on the very same ground that the recognition order dated 12.8.1998 of the Committee of Management headed by Sri Banshidhar had been stayed by this Court. The subsequent dismissal in default of the writ petition on 7.7.2000 would not in any manner enable this Court to reach to a conclusion that on the date when the suspension order dated 12.4.1999 had been pastel the Committee of Management of either of the two parties was in effective control. Consequently while not recording a finding as to which of the rival Committee of Management were managing the institution it is recorded that the impugned order could not have been passed by the Committee of Management headed by Sri Banshidhar for two reasons, the first that there was an interim order operating against him on that date and secondly the salary of the teachers and other staff of the institution was being paid by the authorities under an order of single operation. Consequently the impugned suspension order having been passed without jurisdiction cannot be sustained.

It is accordingly set aside without having any effect on any subsequent proceedings that may have taken place in accordance with law.

The writ petition stands allowed. No order is passed as to costs.