D.S. Sinha, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri P.N. Saxena, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri Anil Bhushan, holding brief of Sri C.P. Srivastava, learned counsel representing the contesting respondent No. 1. This petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order dated 27th May, 1985, passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Kanpur Dehat, the respondent No. 3, allowing the appeal of Sri Jai Chandra Bahadur Dwivedi, a IV Class employee of Sri Lalmani Vidyalaya Higher Secondary School, Reona, district Kanpur, and setting aside the order of his dismissal dated 13th June, 1983.
(2.) THE impugned order is based on the finding that the dismissal of the respondent No. 1 was effected in violation of the Regulations 35, 36 and 37 of Chapter III of the Regulations framed under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, hereinafter called the Act. It is not disputed that by virtue of Regulation 100 the provisions of Regulations 34, 36 and 37 of Chapter III of the Regulations, which regulate the procedure for taking action of dismissal, removal, discharge, reduction in rank and diminution in emoluments of Head or teacher of an institution recognised under the Act, Mutatis mutandis apply to the IV Class employees of such institution also.
(3.) REGULATION 36 of the Regulations contemplates that the grounds on which it is proposed to take action shall be reduced in the form of a definite charge or charges which shall be communicated to the delinquent employee and which shall be so clear and precise as to give sufficient indication to the charged employee of the facts and circumstances against him. It is further contemplated that the delinquent employee shall be given three weeks from the date of the receipt of the charge -sheet to put in a written statement of his defence and to state whether he desired to be heard in person. The Regulation also envisages production of evidence, right to cross -examine the witnesses and keeping of sufficient record of evidence, statement of the findings and the grounds thereof. The Regulation also empowers the authority conducting the enquiry to make his own recommendation regarding punishment to be imposed on the employee.;