- (1.) SHRI Rattan Lal Sharma, respondent in -the present Letters Patent Appeal, was working as a Principal in Dr, Hari Ram Coeducation Higher Secondary school, Datarpur, District Hoshiarpur. A charge-sheet dated 18th October, 1970, containing as many as 12 charges, was served on the said Shri Rattan Lal Sharma by the President of the Managing Committee of the school. Almost all the charges related to some embezzlement of school funds. After receipt of the reply to the charge-sheet, a three member Enquiry Committee was appointed to go into the charges. Enquiry Committee conducted the enquiry as envisaged by the Punjab Aided Schools (Security of Service) Act, 1969 (hereinafter called the Act) and held the Principal Shri Rattan Lal Sharma as guilty of all the charges. After agreeing with the enquiry report, the Managing Committee decided to dismiss the said Principal from service. As required under Section 3 (2) of the Act, the confirmation of the proposed punishment was sought from the Deputy Commissioner. The respondent Sari Rattan Lal Sharma made a representation against the proposed punishment before the Deputy Commissioner and after hearing the parties, the Deputy Commissioner confirmed the order of dismissal vide order dated 18th March, 1971 (Annexure P 9) Appeal of the respondent before the Commissioner, Jullundur Division, was also rejected vide order dated 3rd December, 1973 (Annexure P 10 ).
(2.) AGGRIEVED by the said order, respondent Shri Rattan Lal Sharma, had filed a writ petition in this Court It may be stated here that one Maru Ram who was a teacher in the same school was one of the members of the Enquiry Committee, which west into the charges against respondent-Principal. Shri Maru Ram had been inducted in the Committee as a representative of the teachers, which is the requirement of the Government instructions to have one representative or the teachers on the Enquiry Committee. Shri Maru Ram was also a witness to prove Charge No. 12, to which a reference shall be made hereinafter. The learned Single Judge held that the Enquiry Committee was biased, inasmuch as Shri Maru Ram who was a witness against the Principal was also a member of the Enquiry Committee. Since, according to the learned Single Judge the Enquiry Committee was biased, therefore, the report was biased and the order of the Deputy Commissioner confirming the order of dismissal of the writ petitioner as well as the order of the Commissioner dismissing his appeal were liable to be set aside being based on a biased enquiry. On these premises, the writ petition was allowed aid the above-said two orders were set aside. Dissatisfied with the judgment of the learned Single Judge, the Management of the school has come up in Letters Patent Appeal.
(3.) CHARGE No. 12, to prove which, Shri Mara Ram had appeared as a witness, was in the following terms :" 12. The following amounts are reported to have been used by you and are unaccounted for : A sum of Rs. 129-37 on account of amalgamated fund for the month of December, 1969 given to you by Sh. Maru Ram teacher in charge amalgamated fund. " There is no doubt that to prove this charge, Shri Maru Ram had stepped into the witness box.;