S.K. Dhaon, J. - (1.) On 17th April, 1983, the Committee of Management of Bhartiya Siksha Sadan Intermediate College, Sikandarpur, Farrukhabad (hereinafter referred to as the College) resolved to terminate the services of the respondent No. 3, Raj Kumar Sharma, a Head clerk. The respondent No. 3 preferred an appeal. The Deputy Director of Education passed an order dated 6th January, 1987 allowing the appeal in part. He set aside the order of termination. However, he substituted certain minor punishments instead of the order of termination of service. This order of the Deputy Director of Education is being impugned by the Committee of Management in the present writ petition.
(2.) It is not in dispute that the Committee of Management passed its resolution dated 17th April, 1983, terminating the services of the respondent No. 3 without obtaining the prior approval of the District Inspector of Schools. One of the grounds given for setting aside the order of the Committee of Management was that the action had been taken by the Committee of Management in violation of Regulation 31 as contained in Chapter III of the Regulations framed under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act. These Regulations provide that the punishment of removal or discharge from service could be imposed upon an employee only with the prior approval of the Inspector or the Regional Inspectors, as the case may be. However, the Deputy Director thought that some minor punishment should be imposed upon the respondent No. 3.
(3.) Two contentions have been advanced in support of this petition. The first is that the District Inspector of Schools in approved the resolution of the Committee of Management terminating the services of the petitioner and, therefore, in any view of the matter, the order of termination will be deemed to come into existence from the date of the approval. This is not a sound contention. The regulation framing authority made its intention clear by using the word 'prior' in Regulation 31. The use of this word leaves no scope for the argument that the approval given on a subsequent date will infuge life into the order of punishment and bring it into existence from the date of the approval. The resolution of the Committee of Management was still born in the absence of an approval and no life could be infuged into it by subsequent approval.;