- (1.) The petitioner in this writ petition is seeking quashing of the order dated 24.10.1998 passed by the District Magistrate, Ballia whereby it has been directed that the petitioners who were working on the post of Assistant Teacher should not be paid their salary. Subsequently by way of amendment Annexure-10-B, which is an enquiry report, in an enquiry conducted under the order of the High Court dated 17.1.2006 has also been challenged. Briefly stated the facts of the present case are that there is an Institution known as Jangali Baba Purwa Vidya Mandir, Kathaura, District Ballia. The said Institution is stated to be recognized and aided and governed by the U.P. Recognized Basic School (Junior High Schools Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers) Rules, 1978 as well as the U.P. Junior High School (Payment of Salary of Teachers and Other Employees) Act, 1978. It is stated that in the Institution there are nine sanctioned posts of teachers including the Head Master and four posts of non teaching staff (one Clerk and three peons). The two petitioners were appointed as Assistant Teacher on 21.12.1992 and 29.12.1992 respectively. Their papers were sent for approval to the Basic Shiksha Adhikari and by the orders dated 6.6.1994 and 23.3.1995 approval has also been granted by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Ballia and ever since the petitioners have been drawing their salary till September, 1998. On 21.9.1998 the Senior Treasury Officer made certain queries from the office of the Basic Shiksha Adhikari with regard to the appointment of the petitioners. A reply was given by the Finance & Accounts Officer of the office of the District Basic Education Officer as well as the Basic Education Officer vide their report/reply dated 23.9.1998 and 14.10.1998 respectively. Thereafter one Sri P.N. Tiwari is stated to have written to the District Magistrate, Ballia to cancel the appointment of the petitioners and in pursuance thereof the impugned order dated 24.10.1998 has been passed by the District Magistrate, Ballia whereby he has directed that an enquiry be held in the matter and till then no salary should be paid to the petitioners. It is at this stage that the writ petition was filed challenging the order dated 24.10.1998.
(2.) The High Court by the order dated 16.1.2006 directed that since the impugned order mentioned that it was passed subject to enquiry being held therefore the Additional Director, Basic Education or Director, Basic Education shall hold the enquiry himself. The petitioners may also be given reasonable opportunity to defend themselves. In paragraph 7 C of the amended writ petition it has been stated that the petitioner no.1 left the college and has been appointed as Assistant Teacher in another school and therefore the writ petition has become infructuous so far as he is concerned. Accordingly so far as the petitioner no.1 Vinod Kumar Singh is concerned, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. So far as the petitioner no.2 is concerned, it is stated that the Additional Director of Education (Basic) in his enquiry report has held that a total six posts of Assistant Teacher were created by the order dated 4.2.1985. It is stated that against six posts four persons namely Sahjanand Chaudhari, Sudama Prasad Verma, Rama Kant Ram, Subhash Chand Chaudhari were working. Sudama Prasad Verma attained the age of superannuation and retired from service on 30.6.1990. It is against the vacancy of Sudama Prasad Verma that the petitioner no.2 was appointed and a report to that effect was submitted by the Manager of the Committee of Management to the District Basic Education Officer vide letter dated 31.12.1993, copy of which has been filed as Annexure-10-D to the writ petition.
(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the District Basic Education Officer,Ballia, District Magistrate, Ballia and District Inspector of Schools, Ballia and therein it has been stated that the Junior High School in question was upgraded to the level of High School (unaided) and only those teachers were getting salary who were appointed against sanctioned posts at the level of Junior High School. It is also stated that on 4.2.1985 11 posts were created in accordance with the provisions of Section 9 of the Payment of Salary Act, 1978 namely, one Head Master, six C.T. Grade Teachers, one Clerk and three Peons and they were getting salary after 4.2.1985. Besides, two other persons, namely, Shri Narendra Chaudhary and Subhash Chaudhary were getting salary under section 33 of the Act, 1978. One peon had retired and therefore, 10 employees were drawing salary. It is further stated that the salary bill of February, March and April, 1998 were prepared and signed by the officiating Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Ballia (deponent of the counter affidavit) and it was also signed by the Principal of the respondent-Institution (Annexure C.A-2, C.A.-3 and C.A. 4). These documents show that the salary bill of only 8 employees were produced by the Principal of the Institution and counter signed by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Ballia. The petitioners, however, colluded with the Accounts Officer in the office of Basic Shiksha Adhikari and submitted forged bill adding the names of the two petitioners under the signature of the then Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Shri Sada Shiv Gupta on 25.5.1998. It is also stated that the Accounts Officer put up a note directing the Junior Auditor to submit his explanation as to how two extra names of Teachers had been proposed in comparison to the previous salary bill, and the appointment letters of the employees were also called for. The Junior Auditor submitted a report stating that as per the letter of the Director of Education dated 4.2.1985 only 8 posts of Teachers had been created and the appointment letters of six Teachers was also approved by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari. One letter was written by the deponent Ms. Jalees Fatima, District Basic Shiksha Adhikari on 17.8.1998 informing that some excess Teachers were getting salary on forged documents. One complaint dated 11.8.1998 was also made by one Shri Chandra Dev claiming to be the member of the Committee of Management of the Institution. The Basic Shiksha Adhikari Ms. Jalees Fatima has written a letter dated 29.5.1998 demanding the order of creation of posts by the Director of Education as well as the appointment letters of the two Teachers (namely, the petitioners). An explanation was also called for from the Principal of the institution by another letter dated 25.8.1998. The deponent also submitted a letter to the District Magistrate informing him that the alleged letters of appointment were forged documents under the forged signature of the deponent Ms. Jalees Fatima obtained in collusion with the Accounts Officer by which payment of salary was made to the two petitioners.;