Ashoke Kumar Dasadhikari, J. - (1.) The writ petitioner is aggrieved against the order passed by the Appeal Committee, which has confirmed the order of removal of the writ petitioner. The writ petitioner challenged the impugned order alleging that the Appeal Committee failed to consider the appeal preferred by the writ petitioner without consideration of the relevant facts that the unauthorised absence on his side is due to some ailment and for meeting an accident which has caused his head injury.
(2.) Learned Counsel for the writ petitioner submits that the dismissal order was passed without following the proper procedure and accordingly, the writ petition should be allowed by quashing the order of removal as well as the order of the Appeal Committee.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the State appears and submits that the writ petitioner absented himself for a long time although the school took a lenient view on two earlier occasions granting long leave without pay. It was submitted that the writ petitioner did not join the school for a long time and also without any intimation and/or application for such absence.;