Siddharth, J. - (1.) Heard Rajeev Kumar Srivastava, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.M. Saggi, learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.3.
(2.) The petitioner has filed the above noted writ petition, praying for the following reliefs: (i).Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the suspension order dated 11.10.99 (Annexure No.10 to the writ petition). (ii).Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari thereby quashing the charge sheet dated 19.10.99 and supplementary charge sheet dated 21.12.99 (Annexure No.13 and 19 to the writ petition). (iii).Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem, fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case, AND (iv).Award cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner. (v).Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the termination order dated 13.01.2000 (Annexure No.24 to the writ petition).
(3.) The petitioner's case is that Tulsa Devi Primary School is a private Institution imparting Education upto Class-Vth. Subsequently, it was recognized by U.P. Board of Basic Education and grant-in-aid was provided to the Institution by the Department of Social Welfare and State of U.P. since March, 1992. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the said Institution on 15.07.1980 and later on she was worked as Head Mistress upto January 1992. After recognition of the Institution in March 1992 she was again appointed as Head Mistress. Salary of the teachers of the said Institution was released by the Government and the department of Social Welfare, but the respondent no.2 did not paid the full salary of the teachers and the Head Mistress of the Institution and embezzled the amount. The petitioner and other teachers of the Institution made complaints to District Social Welfare Officer, District Magistrate and other authorities which led to suspension of the petitioner vide order dated 11.10.1999 and a disciplinary enquiry was initiated against her. A Charge Sheet dated 19.10.1999 was issued to the petitioner without annexing the documents forming the basis of charges and the petitioner demanded those documents. By the letter dated 10.12.1999, the Enquiry Officer informed the petitioner that she has refused to receive the copy of evidence in support of charge and finally by the order dated 13.01.2000 the services of the petitioner was terminated and the same was challenged in the writ petition by way of amendment in the writ petition.;