RAJAN ROY, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Manish Goel and Sri Punit Kumar Gupta, learned for the petitioner, Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri V.D. Shukla, learned counsel for respondent No.3 and learned standing counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2.
(2.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner - committee of management has challenged an order of the D.I.O.S. dated 18.10.2014, whereby, the said officer has directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondent No.3 in service as he has been released on bail on 14.08.2014 and the suspension order dated 12.08.2014 not having been approved during the statutory period of 60 days had automatically come to an end in view of Section 16 -G(7) of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921.
(3.) AS there was not much of a factual dispute, therefore, the case was heard at the admission stage and judgment was reserved on 31.10.2014 and the same is being pronounced today. A criminal case was lodged against the respondent No.3 by his wife under Section 498 -A, I.P.C., 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, i.e. Crime Case No.410 of 2005. Charges were framed against him by the court concerned on 02.09.2008. Advertisement No.1/2009 was issued for selection of assistant teachers and the respondent No.3 also applied in pursuance thereof. He was convicted by the trial court under the aforesaid provisions vide judgment and order dated 12.08.2010. A sentence of two years imprisonment for the offence under Section 498 -A, I.P.C., six months' imprisonment under Section 3/4, Dowry Prohibition Act along with Rs.1000/ - as fine was imposed upon him. After the conviction, the respondent No.3 filed Appeal No.22 of 2010 before the appellate court challenging his conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court, whereupon, he was released on bail in pursuance to the order of the court dated 16.08.2010. The respondent No.3 was selected. An intimation of his selection for the petitioner college was sent by the D.I.O.S. on 09.11.2010, in pursuance to which, the appointment letter was issued by the petitioner on 18.11.2010 and on the same date, the respondent No.3 joined in the institution. The factum of his conviction in the criminal case and pendency of appeal was not disclosed by the respondent No.3 at any stage. The appeal of the respondent No.3 came to be dismissed on 15.07.2014. On 21.07.2014, he applied for sanction of medical leave annexing therewith a discharge slip issued from the District Hospital Banda advising him 20 days bed rest. On 22.07.2014, the respondent No.3 surrendered on account of dismissal of his appeal and was taken into custody. He remained in jail till 14.08.2014, when he was released in pursuance of an order dated 11.08.2014 passed by the High Court in Criminal Revision No.2131 of 2014 for enlarging him on bail. Thereafter, a complaint was received by the petitioner from the father in law of the respondent No.3 informing about his conviction in the criminal case and the proceedings thereafter. The matter being serious, the committee of management resolved to suspend the petitioner. Accordingly, the order dated 12.08.2014 was issued mentioning the respondent No.3's conviction in the criminal case as also his incarceration w.e.f. 22.07.2014. Accordingly, he was placed under suspension w.e.f. 22.07.2014. The requisite papers were sent by the petitioner to the D.I.O.S. for his approval on 09.09.2014. In the meantime, it appears that applications dated 19.08.2014, 20.08.2014, 21.08.2014, 26.09.2014 and 13.10.2014 were sent by the respondent No.3 to the D.I.O.S. for his reinstatement after being released on bail. In pursuance to the decision of the managing committee, disciplinary proceedings were also initiated against the petitioner and a charge sheet was issued to him on 24.09.2014 containing nine charges, four of which related to the criminal case against him, including the concealment of the said case by the respondent No.3. On 18.10.2014, a reminder was sent by the petitioner to the D.I.O.S. for taking a decision under Section 16 -G(7) of the Act, 1921. On the same date, i.e. 18.10.2014 the impugned order was passed wherein the D.I.O.S. after taking note of the order dated 11.08.2014 passed in Criminal Revision No.2131 of 2014 ordering release of the respondent No.3 on bail, his consequent release on 14.08.2014 and also that no approval was granted by the D.I.O.S. within the statutory period of 60 days, has concluded, that the in view of Section 16 -G(7) the suspension order had automatically come to an end and further ordered the petitioner to reinstate the respondent No.3 immediately after cancelling the suspension order.;