R.H. Zaidi, J. - (1.) In these three writ petitions, common questions of law and facts are involved and parties are also common, therefore, these petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment. Writ Petition No. 1560 (M/S)/96 is treated as the leading case.
(2.) The relevant facts of the case are that election of office-bearers and members of Committee of Management of the College, known as Shri Lallan Ji Brahmchari Inter College, Ambedkar Nagar. was held on 13.11.1995, tn which Lallan Ji Brahmchari was elected as Manager of the College, besides other office bearers and members. It is stated that there were serious charges against respondent No. 3. who was holding office of Principal of the college, on ad hoc basis, after retirement of permanent regular Principal, therefore, he was suspended on 8.2.96 by Committee of Management. Papers relating to suspension of respondent No. 3 Ram, Avadh Singh were submitted to District Inspector of Schools for approval. It was on 12.11.96 that charge-sheet was framed and Sub-committee was appointed to enquire into the charges on 13.2.96. Thereafter a notice is stated to have been sent to respondent No. 3 Ram Avadh Singh under registered-cover ; but no reply of the same was received. Another notice was thereafter sent by enquiring committee fixing 22.2.1996. Since Ram Avadh Singh did not co-operate with the enquiry, consequently enquiry committee submitted its report on 9.3.1996 to the Committee of Management. Committee of Management, on receipt of the report of enquiry committee, sent a notice to respondent No. 3 Ram Avadh Singh, asking him to appear before it on 15.3.96. On the said date, respondent No. 3 did not appear before Committee of Management. Consequently, notice was published in newspaper. On 15.3.97 respondent No. 3 Ram Avadh Singh is alleged to have sought time to file reply. Time was granted by the Management Committee, to respondent No. 3, till 24.3.96 and he was asked to appear before Committee of Management on the said date. Regarding fixation of date for appearance and hearing a letter was also sent to respondent, on 12.3.96. Respondent No. 3 Ram Avadh Singh did not appear before Committee of Management, nor filed his explanation. Consequently, in its meeting held on 24.3.96, the Committee of Management resolved to terminate the services of respondent No, 3 Ram Avadh Singh. After passing the said resolution, requisite papers were sent to District Inspector of Schools on 14.4.1996. which was received at the office of District Inspector of Schools. It is stated that District Inspector of Schools, in view of the provisions of U. P. Secondary Education Services and Commission (Procedure for Approval of Punishment) Regulations. 1985, was required to communicate said order resolution to Services Commission, but papers were not sent. Meanwhile, District Inspector of Schools, directed the Manager vide letter dated 31.5.96 and 5.6.96, to make payment of arrears of salary of respondent No. 3. Committee of Management on receipt of the said letters, sought clarification from the District Inspector of Schools. It was vide notice dated 14.6.96, District Inspector of Schools directed Committee of Management to show-cause as to why account of the college be not placed under single operation. On receipt of the said letter, no reply was submitted, but Manager of the college asked District Inspector of Schools for guidance Marg Darshon. Thereafter, vide order dated 8.7.96 placed account of the college under single operation by the District Inspector of Schools.
(3.) Challenging validity of the order dated 8.7.96. petitioner filed Writ Petition bearing No. 1560 (M/S)/96, before this Court and this Court vide Interim order dated 1.8.96 stayed operation of the order dated 8.7.96. In pursuance of the order passed by this Court. District Inspector of Schools, withdrew his order dated 8.7.96 and thereafter, salary of members of teaching and non-teaching staff, except respondent No. 3 Ram Avadh Singh, is being paid in accordance with law.;