K.C. Agarwal, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by Govind Saran Aeron for a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the Deputy Director of Education dated 10 -11 -1979 passed in an appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 16G of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act. By this order the Deputy Director of Education upheld the decision of the District Inspector of Schools approving the proposal of the Committee of Management of the College, where the petitioner was appointed, for terminating his service. This writ petition has a chequered history and the facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition may be briefly stated as follows: - - The petitioner was appointed as Principal of Munnalal Inter College, Waziraganj, Badaun on probation for one year on the 18th March 1973. According to the petitioner he was irrevocably confirmed though the resolution of that date passed by the committee of management carried a rider that within three months of the date of that resolution if any complaints were received against him, the committee of management would be free to reconsider that resolution. The petitioner has asserted that immediately on the expiry of the period of one year from the date of his appointment on probation, he became permanent on 17th March 1974 though this position has been controverted in the counter -affidavit. But the counsel appearing for the contesting respondent did not challenge the claim of the petitioner for having become permanent due to the facts which will be narrated just now.
(2.) ON 16th June 1974 the committee of management passed a resolution constituting a sub -committee for inquiry into certain charges which had come to its notice against the petitioner. In pursuance of this resolution a sub -committee was constituted for enquiring into the charges. The sub -committee submitted its report dated 17th July 1974 to the committee of management. Having found that the explanation offered by the petitioner to the charges was not satisfactory, the committee of management passed a resolution terminating his service and thereafter further resolved to send the same to the District Inspector of Schools for his approval. The District Inspector of Schools considered the report submitted by the enquiry committee the resolution of the committee of management and all other relevant papers sent to him and having found that the charges levelled against the petitioner had not been proved, he disapproved the proposal of the committee of management on 19th December 1974. The committee of management did not file any appeal against this disapproval of the order and as such it became final. On 6 -1 -1975 the committee accepted the decision dated 19 -12 -1974 and called upon the petitioner to resume his duty but with the new condition that he would be treated as fresh on probation of one year from the date of his joining duty. The petitioner represented to the committee of management that he should be treated as being in continuous service of the college and the condition that he should undergo a fresh period of probation for one year, be removed. The Manager by his letter dated 31 -1 -1975 asked the petitioner to join the college without referring to the request made by him for removing the fresh condition imposed. Before this matter could be settled, the petitioner attended the college on 17th March 1976 but he was not handed over the charge by the acting Principal. On 2 -7 -1975, the petitioner was served with an order dated 26/30 -6 -1975 whereby the services of the petitioner were terminated. The committee of management passed another resolution on the same effect on 17 -8 -1975. The District Inspector of Schools by his order dated 28 -11 -1975 approved the resolution terminating the petitioner's services but in appeal filed by the petitioner the order approving termination was set aside by the Deputy Director of Education on 28 -2 -1977. He, however, directed that the petitioner would not be entitled to his salary during the period of his absence from January 21, 1975 to February 28, 1977. This order of the Deputy Director of Education in so far as it held that the petitioner was not entitled to get this salary for the period mentioned above was challenged by means of Writ No. 650 of 1977. The writ was allowed on 16 -10 -1978 and the order of the Deputy Director of Education relating to the salary of the petitioner, was quashed. On 1st July 1977 the petitioner joined services in the college as its Principal. Within few hours of his joining duty the petitioner was suspended from service and the inquiry committee was constituted by the committee of management framed as many as 10 charges against him. The charge -sheet was delivered to him. The petitioner challenged his suspension by means of letter dated 15 -7 -1977. On 27 -7 -1977 the District Inspector of Schools did not approve his suspension and called upon the management to permit the petitioner to join as Principal of the college at once. Before this could be done, the petitioner was sent a communication dated 1 -8 -1977 to appear before the inquiry committee on 9 -8 -1977. On that date, it is not disputed, that the petitioner did not appear before the inquiry committee. By means of a telegram dated 3rd September 1977 the petitioner was again required to appear on 7 -9 -1977 at 4 P.M. The petitioner absented himself and did not participate in the proceedings. In the mean time on 15 -8 -1977 the committee prepared its report upholding the charges and forwarded the same to the committee of management. On 10th September, 1977 the committee of management called upon the petitioner to appear before it on 15th September 1977. The petitioner did not appear before the committee of management on that date. Thereafter the committee passed a resolution seeking approval of the District Inspector of Schools for dismissing the petitioner. The District Inspector of Schools added one more charge against the petitioner and after recording the findings on the various charges levelled he accorded approval to the proposed dismissal of the petitioner with effect from 1 -7 -1977. Against this order, the petitioner went up in appeal to the Deputy Director of Education. The Deputy Director of Education dismissed the appeal on 9th November, 1979. Challenging these orders, the present writ petition has been filed.
(3.) THE first argument raised by Sri Govind Saran Aeron, who appeared before us in person, was that the petitioner having been exonerated of all the charges in the first Disciplinary Proceedings which culminated by the order of District Inspector of Schools disapproving his dismissal. No fresh proceedings of termination on these very charges could either be started or could be taken. Consequently his dismissal on those charges is illegal.;