E. S. Varma, J. - (1.) .-
(2.) OPPOSITE parties nos. 3 to 8 in writ petition No. 1585 of 1983 are Assistant Teachers in the institution run by the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is that the said teachers have been absenting themselves from the institution and have not been attending to teaching work from various dates. According to the petitioner the said opposite parties did not inform the reason for their absence to the Manager or the Principal of the College. On 2-2-1983, opposite parties 3 to 8 addressed a letter to the Deputy Director of Education in which they complained that the Principal of college on 31-1-1983 misbehaved with Shri Basudeo Verma, OPPOSITE party no. 7. OPPOSITE party no. 1 vide his letter dated 7-2-1983 intimated this fact to the Manager of the College. A true copy of the said letter is Annexure 3 to the writ petition. By Annexure 4, opposite party no. 1 required the Manager of the College to make an inquiry at his level and to intimate the result of the inquiry to him by post. A true copy of the letter is Annexure 4 to the writ petition. After the receipt of the said letter, the Manager of the College made an inquiry into the allegations levelled by Shri Basudeo Verma against the Principal of the College and by communication dated 9-2-1983, opposite party no. 1 was informed of the result of the inquiry. A true copy of the said letter is Annexure 5 to the writ petition. A perusal of Annexure 5 indicates that the Manager of the College reported to the District Inspector of Schools that the allegations of the teachers in regard to the misbehaviour of the Principal of the College were unfounded. The report further indicates that on 31-1-1983 opposite party no. 7 Shri Basudeo Verma came to the college at about 12 o 'clock in the noon and the Principal told him that while singing the Attendance Register he may indicate the time of his coming. On this opposite party no. 7 misbehaved and used abusive language against the Principal. The Manager also reported that opposite parties nos. 3 to 5, 7 and 8 did not attend the college from 3-2-1983 to 9-2-1983 and that they have not attended the college and have also not applied for leave of absence Indicating reasons for their absence. The petitioner has also stated that in respect of the allegations levelled by opposite parties 3 to 8 addressed to opposite party no. 1 investigation was made by the Superintendent of Police and the District Magistrate, Rae Bareli and they felt satisfied that there was no truth in the allegations made by opposite parties 3 to 8 in their representation dated 2/2/1983. The said opposite parties also reported to opposite party no 1 that there was danger to their lives and they were not attending the college and were reporting to opposite party no. 1 for purposes of their attendance being noted in his office. OPPOSITE party no 1, after taking into account the representation of opposite parties 3 to 8 and having received the reports of the Manager of the college, the Supreintendent of Police and the District Magistrate, Rae Bareli, intimated the said opposite parties that the investigation of the said three authorities indicated that there was no truth in the allegation of there being any danger to the lives of opposite parties 3 to 8 in attending their duties at the college. OPPOSITE party no. 1, therefore, directed opposite parties nos. 3 to 8 to report for duty at the college on 7-3-1983 so that further loss may not be caused to the students in their teaching. A perusal of the record also indicates that opposite party no. 2 required opposite party no. 1 to permit opposite parties nos. 3 to 8 to mark their attendance in the office of opposite party no. 1 till adequate arrangements for safety of opposite parties were made. OPPOSITE party no. 2 also directed opposite party no. 1 that if opposite parties nos. 3 to 8 attend his office than they may be paid their salary for the period also. The petitioner's case is that opposite parties nos. 3 to 8 are absconding from duty and have not been attending to their duties in the College and for this reason they are not entitled to the salary which they claim. In this petition the petitioner has challenged the order passed by opposite party no. 1 dated 18-3-1983, Annexure 1 to the writ petition whereby opposite party no. 1 has directed the petitioner to pay the salary payable to opposite parties 3 to 8 failing which the payment of salary shall be made in accordance with the provisions of the U. P. High Schools and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and others Employees) Act, 1971 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act). Annexure 1 also informs the petitioner that if the salary was not paid within ten days then the account relating to payment of salary shall be operated by opposite party no 1 in accordance with section 5 of the Act. The petitioner has challenged this order, Annexure 1 by means of this petition. While admitting the writ petition this court stayed the operation of the order Annexure 1 to the writ petition. The prayer in this writ petition is that opposite parties 3 to 8 are not entitled to their salary as they are absconding from their duty and on account of their conduct, the interest of the institution is being jeopardised as there is no teaching work done in the institution. It is, therefore, prayed that the order, Annexur 1 to the petition, dated 18-3-1-1983 be quashed and the college may not be required to pay salary to opposite parties 3 to 8. Writ Petition No 5207 of 1983 has also been filed by Committee of Management of Dadaur Inter College, Dadaur, District Rae Bareli. In this petition, it has been stated that opposite parties 3 to 8 in writ petition No. 1585 of 1983 were not attending to the teaching work in the college with effect from 3-2-1983 and had been absenting themselves from work. It has been stated in the petition that on account of their being absent from the duty, the petitioner sought permission to appoint teachers in place of opposite parties 3 to 8. The District Inspector of Schools by his orders Annexurs 9 and 10 to the petition, restrained the petitioner from making further appointments in place of opposite parties 3 to 8. In this petition it has been prayed that a writ of mandamus be issued to the District Inspector of Schools, Rae Bareli commanding him to accord approval to the appointment of the candidates selected by the Committee of Management of the College. This petition was also admitted and the operation of the orders Annexures 8, 9 and 10 to the petition was stayed.
(3.) BY an order of this court these two writ petition Nos. 1585 and 5207 of 1983 were directed to be heard together. Mr. B. C Saxena appears on behalf of the petitioners in both the writ petitions. In writ petition No." 1585 of 1983 it was strenuously contended that if the petitioners were not attending to their duties and were absconding, opposite party no. 1 has no jurisdiction to direct the petitioner to make payment of salary in terms of the Act. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that if opposite parties nos 3 to 8 were not discharging their duties as teachers, they are not entitled to salary. I have heard Mr. B. C. Saxena on this aspect at some length but we find ourselves unable to agree with the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Section 3 of the Act provides that notwithstanding any contract to the contrary, the salary of a teacher or other employee of an institution in respect of any period after the thirty-first day of March, 1971, shall be paid to him before the expiry of the twentieth day or such earlier day as the State Government may by general or special order in that behalf appoint. Sub-section (3) of section 3 of the Act provides that where the salary of teacher or other employee of an institution is not paid in accordance with sub-section (1) of section 3 due to any default on the part of the management the Inspector may, without prejudice to any other provisions of the Act, pay or cause to be paid within ten days from the date mentioned in that subsection such salary from the moneys credited to the account mentioned in subsection (1) of section 4 of the Act. Section 5 of the Act provides the procedure for payment of salary in case of certain institutions.;