B.N.SAPRU,J. - (1.) THE petitioner was employed as a teacher in the A.S. Intermediate College, Mawana, district Meerut. The com­mittee of Management of the college appointed an enquiry officer to examine certain complaints against the petitioner. The Enquiry officer submitted a report against the petitioner. Thereupon the committee of Management by resolution No. 22 of 1972 resolved that approval should be submitted to the District Inspector of Schools as required under Section 16-G(3) of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act for according approval for the termination of the petitioner's services.
(2.) THE District Inspector of Schools, by his letter dated August 30, 1972 issued a show cause notice to the petitioner asking him to explain why the committee's proposal for terminating his service should not be accepted The petition submitted his reply to the District Inspector of Schools in reference to the two charge-sheets dated February 24, 1972 and March 4, 1973 which had been served on the petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner received another letter No, T-1 /15010/72-73 dated November 18/22, 1972 from the District Inspec­tor of Schools asking him to submit his explanation in respect of three additional charges which accompanied the said letter. The pe­titioner submitted his reply to the District Inspector in respect of the aforesaid letter dated November 18/22, 1972. In his reply the petitioner pointed out that the Enquiry Officer had given him only two charge sheets. One dated February 24, 1972 and the other dated August 6, 1972, and none of these charge sheets contained the charges mentioned in the letter of the District Inspector of Schools dated November 18/22, 1972. The District Inspector of Schools thereupon wrote to the petitioner asking him to contract the committee of Man­agement and obtain a copy of their letter dated June 30, 1972 ad­dressed by the Management to the District Inspector of Schools. A copy of this letter was supplied to the petitioner by the Manage­ment. In this letter the Management had written to the Inspector that the petitioner's character was suspicious and his conduct was unsatisfactory, and had given illustrations in support of this allega­tion. It is further stated that the petitioner had brought false charges against others. The letter also referred to some previous charge-sheets served upon the petitioner earlier. According to the petitioner the District Inspector of Schools did not fix any 'date for hearing of the matter before him and by his order dated March 14, 1973 refused to record approval to the resolu­tion of the committee of Management proposing to terminate the services of the petitioner but directed that a serious warning may be given to the petitioner by way of punishment and that four incre­ments from the date of suspension may be withheld.
(3.) BOTH the committee of Management and the petitioner filed appeals against the order of the District Inspector of Schools before the Deputy Director of Education. The committee of Management was aggrieved by the order of the District Inspector of Schools whereby he had refused to accord approval of the proposal for the termination of the petitioner's services; while the petitioner was ag­grieved by the punishment imposed upon him.;