V.M. Sahai, J. - (1.) The petitioner was appointed on 8.8.1968 as Lecturer English in Ambika Prasad Intermediate College. Moradabad (In brief Institution). He was confirmed on 9.8.1969. He was a member of Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh and Bhartiya Janta Party. He was elected District Secretary of the Bhartiya Janta Party in 1987. From 14.8.1975 to 30.7.1977, he was detained under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act. From 1.11.1980 to 10.12.1980 and from 11.7.1987 to 11.7.1988 he was detained under the National Security Act. He was arrested on 11.7.1987 from the gate of Government Inter College, Moradabad, while he was going to attend his training under the new education policy. It is stated that when the petitioner was arrested Principal of the Institution and Mr. Khangiri. Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade were along with the petitioner. The petitioner, after his arrest, told the Principal to inform the manager about his arrest. The manager issued notice on 24.7.1987 calling his explanation for absence from the institution without any information. On 27.7.1987 the petitioner informed the Manager that while he was going to take part in the training scheme, he was arrested by the police, therefore, he was unable to attend the institution. The reply of the petitioner dated 27.4.1987 was sent by the management to the District Inspector of Schools who on 14.8.1987 directed the management to take administrative action. The management passed a resolution on 4.9.1987 and gave notice to the petitioner as to why he be not dismissed from service as he was absent from 11.7.1987 without any leave and in pursuance of the resolution the management issued a notice on 10.9.1987 to the petitioner. On 3.10.1987 the petitioner replied to the notice dated 10.9.1987 and informed that he was in Jail under the National Security Act and requested for sympathetic consideration of his case. The management by resolution dated 20.10.1987 appointed the manager of the institution as inquiry officer and authorised him to issue the charge-sheet. The inquiry officer, on 9.12.1987, issued charge-sheet to the petitioner framing two charges against him on 2.1.1988, the petitioner requested the inquiry officer to meet him in jail, but his prayer was not accepted. The inquiry officer issued another letter on 13.1.1988 to the petitioner giving opportunity to him to submit his reply to the charge-sheet which was replied on 23.1.1988 and the petitioner again requested the manager to meet him in jail and permit him to lead oral evidence. Thereafter the inquiry officer met the petitioner in jail on 15.2.1988 and gave questionnaire to the petitioner for answering it. The petitioner replied to the questionnaire that he had been detained in jail under the National Security Act without any reason by the district administration. Apart from the questionnaire given to the petitioner, no enquiry proceedings were held by the inquiry officer and he submitted his report to the management of the institution. The management on 8.7.1988 suspended the petitioner and forwarded it to the District Inspector of Schools for approval. The petitioner was released from Jail on 11.7.1988. The District Inspector of Schools did not grant approval to the suspension order, which lapsed on 6.9.1988 after expiry of 60 days. The petitioner, after expiry of suspension period, went to join on his post but the Principal did not permit him to join under the Instructions of the management of the institution. The resolution of the Committee of Management proposing to dismiss the petitioner from service was sent to U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission, Allahabad (In brief Commission). The petitioner sent a letter dated 24.2.1989 denying all the charges. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 by order dated 28.7.1989 granted approval to the proposal of the Committee of Management of the institution for dismissing the petitioner from service. The management, on 31.8.1989, decided to dismiss the petitioner from service and directed the manager to issue letter of dismissal to the petitioner. The manager, by letter dated 1.9.1989, dismissed the petitioner. The order of the Commission dated 28.7.1989 passed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and consequential resolution of the Committee of Management dated 31.8.1989 and dismissal order dated 1.9.1989 (Annexures-17 and 18 respectively to the writ petition) are under challenge in the instant writ petition.
(2.) I have heard Sri Ashok Khare learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri Rajesh Tandon, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 3 and the learned standing counsel, appearing for other respondents.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the entire enquiry proceeding is vitiated in view of the fact that while the petitioner was in Jail, the enquiry proceeding was carried out by the management in which he did not have reasonable opportunity to participate due to his confinement in jail. He further urged that the petitioner was arrested on 11.7.1987 under the National Security Act and was released from jail on 11.7.1988. The petitioner was arrested being a member of Rashtriya Swyamsewak Sangh and Bhartiya Janta Party and the State Government in a high-handed manner arrested the petitioner for no reason. He lastly urged that the petitioner was not wilfully absent from the institution but was prevented to attend the institution due to his detention under the National Security Act and the charges against the petitioner were not proved.;