- (1.) The short question that arises for consideration in this petitions whether where four teachers are charge sheeted for the same misconduct and punishment or removal from service is proposed by the committee of management which is modified with regard to three teachers by District Inspector of Schools to stopping of one increment for one year, whether the punishment of removed from service awarded to the petitioner, on parity, can be modified on the ground that the co-delinquents on identical charges have been awarded minor punishment.
(2.) The short matrix of the case is that the petitioner was a confirmed Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade working since 1.7.70 in Rajarsh Purshottam Das Tandon Uchchatar Madhymaic Vidyalay, Naini, Mahewa, District Allahabad (in brief institution). He and three teachers working in C.T. Grade namely, Laxmi Kant Bhatt, Ram Krishna Singh and Shiv (in brief C.T. Grade teachers ) were issued charge sheet for misconduct on the same and identical charges. The charges were that in the annual internal examination of the institution of 1983 the teachers refused to sign and accept the notice dated 13.4.83 wherein detailed information and programme of examination was circulated ; though in the first meeting of the examination from 7.15. a.m. to 9.45 a.m. the teachers participated but in the second meeting of the examination from 10.00 a.m. to 12.00 noon they remained absent; in the examinations held on 2.3.4 and 5 May 1983 they did not record as to how many students were absent. The charges were replied by all the four teachers. The enquiry officer submitted his report and found the petitioner and other C.T. Grade teachers guilty of indiscipline, insubordination and dereliction of duty. The management of the institution resolved to remove the teachers from service. The management sent the proposal for removal from service with regard to C.T. Grade teachers to District Inspector of Schools as prior approval for removal is required by law. Since the petitioner was Assistant Teacher L.T. Grade hence the management sent the proposal for obtaining prior approval of U.P. Secondary Educational Service Commission (in brief Commission).
(3.) The District Inspector of Schools by his order dated 11.2.92 modified the proposal sent by the management for removal from service to stoppage of one increment for one year as the punishment was harsh and disproportionate to the charges. So far as the petitioner was concerned the commission granted its approval in its meeting dated 10.1.92. It was communicated by its letter dated 15.1.92 to District Inspector of Schools and the management of the institution. The management by its resolution dated 28.1.92 to removed the petitioner from the service and the order was communicated to the petitioner by letter dated 29.1.92. the petitioner has challenged the orders dated 28.1.92/29.1.92 Annexure 27 to the petitioner as well as the order of the commission dated 10.1.92 communicated by letter dated 15.1.92 Annexure-26 to the writ petition by means of the present writ petition.;