Narayan Shukla, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. Santosh Kumar Mishra, learned Counsel for the Petitioner as well as Mr. Dhruv Mathur, learned Counsel for the Respondents.
(2.) THE Petitioner has challenged the order dated 30th of March, 2010, issued by the President of the Indo Gulf Residents Society, whereby his services have been terminated. The grounds for termination are that he has been found indulging in meeting out corporal punishment to the students from time to time and despite warning he again beaten a student Vishal Sharma of Class VI -B on 19th of November, 2009. The brief facts of the case are that the Petitioner was appointed on the post of T.G.T. (PE) on 1st of August, 2004 in Aditya Birla Public School, Jagdispur on certain terms and conditions laid down in the appointment order. The Petitioner was a confirmed teacher, therefore, he claims protection under condition No. 7 and 22 of the appointment order, which are reproduced hereunder: 7. As a confirmed teacher you will be required to give three months advance notice or salary in lieu of 2 before resigning the job. Similarly the Competent Authority/Principal may terminate your services by giving you an advance notice of three months or salary in lieu of without assigning any reason. 22. In case of any act or commission constituting misconduct of which President, Indo Gulf Residents Society/Principal shall be the sole judge, is alleged against you, you shall be placed under suspension pending enquiry and shall be paid subsistence allowance as admissible to you as per decision of Competent Authority.
(3.) IN view of the above, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner further invited the attention of this Court towards the condition No. 25, which empowers him to keep control over the students and other employees of the Institution to behave in a rowdy or disorderly manner or commit or cause to commit any act subversive or related to indiscipline in the premises of the institution. It is also stated that time to time the Petitioner was issued certificates of honour for his commendable contribution for procuring an excellent result in Board Examination. It is further stated that whatever action he took against the students only just to control them from being undisciplined or to maintain the law and order in the premises of the Institution, without having any intention to punish them. He also denies from beating the students. It is further stated that before issuance of order of termination he has not been provided opportunity of hearing, therefore, the same is in violation of condition No. 7 and 22 of the appointment order.;