A.P.SAHI, J. - (1.) THE petitioner is Assistant Basic Education Officer and he has come up against the suspension order dated 20.11.2009 whereby he is being proceeded with for a disciplinary inquiry on a prima Jade opinion that he was responsible for non-payment of salary to Smt. Vijai Laxmi Singh which has lowered the prestige of the Department as is evident from the background of the litigation in this case.
(2.) ONE Smt. Vijai Laxmi Singh was promoted as an Assistant Teacher in a Senior Primary School where she was working since 2007 but her salary were not released. This Court summoned the Director of Education (Basic) in person to explain as to why the petitioner has not been paid her salary for more than 2 years. The Secretary Basic Education Government of U. P. was also summoned and a counter-affidavit was filed in the writ petition by Shri Anoop Chandra Pandey copy whereof is Annexure-10 to the writ petition. After the filing of the compliance affidavit the Secretary Basic Education, Government of U. P. on 14th November called upon the Director for holding an enquiry within a week as to who were the officials responsible for delay in payment to the teacher for almost two years. Consequent upon the said information having been tendered the Director Education (Basic) passed orders on 20.11.2009 suspending the petitioner which has been assailed in the present writ petition.
(3.) SHRI V. C. Mishra, learned senior counsel contends that the petitioner is the Assistant Basic Education Officer and, therefore, is not responsible for any payment of salary to a teacher. He submits that the responsibility of payment is on the District Basic Education Officer and as a matter of fact the petitioner has been victimized for the mistake of his superior officers. He further submits that an order was passed by Assistant Director of Education (Basic) on 29.11.2007 to stop payment of salary and not to make payment to such teachers who have not complied with the transfer orders. Taking shelter of the said order Shri Mishra contends that it was not possible for the petitioner to have released the salary. Shri Mishra has further invited the attention of the Court to the explanation given by the petitioner on 10.8.2009, copy whereof is Annexure-8 to the writ petition wherein it has been stated that a request had been made to the Basic Education Officer who is the disbursing authority for finalization of the said claim of Smt. Vijai Laxmi Singh. Shri Mishra therefore, contends that the petitioner has no where shown any dereliction in duty and as a matter of fact it was not his duty to make the payments. Accordingly, the ground for suspension cannot be sustained in law.;