H.N.Seth, J. - (1.) WE are not satisfied that there is any merit in the Petitioner's submission that before issuing a notice Under Section 6 of the Uttar Pradesh High Schools and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1971, requiring the Petitioner to show cause why it should not be suspended, it was obligatory upon the Deputy Director of Education to call upon the Petitioner to comply with the certain directions issued by him. Section 6(2) which runs thus: On receipt of a recommendation Under Sub -section (1) the Regional Deputy Director may call upon the management to comply with the said direction or provision or to show cause within a week why the management should not be suspended clearly envisages that after the Deputy Director has received the recommendation made by the Disturb Inspector of Schools Under Sub -section (1) he has an option in the matter and two courses are open to him. The two alternatives are: (1) That he can call upon the management to comply with the direction or provision specified in the recommendation made by the District Inspector of Schools or (2) require the management to show cause within a week why it should not be suspended. The first alternative is not a condition precedent for exercising of the second alternative.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner has also contended that in the circumstances of the case the order passed by the Deputy Director was not appropriate. We are not inclined to go into this aspect of the case. The Act provides an appeal against the impugned order and there is no reason why Petitioner should not, for questioning the propriety of the order, must avail of the remedy provided in the Act itself. In the result we find no merit in this petition which fails and is dismissed.;