S.S. Nijjar, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeks quashing of orders Annexures P -4 and P -6.
(2.) THE original order of termination of service passed by the petitioner - Management was challenged by respondent No. 3 by filing a civil suit. The suit was dismissed. The appeal against the dismissal of the suit was also dismissed. Now it is stated by Mr. Narula that Regular Second Appeal No. 1203 of 1993 is pending for final disposal in this Court. In this writ petition, the only point raised is that the order -Annexure P -6 is without jurisdiction as the State Government had no power to direct that the appeal of the respondent be reheard. According to learned counsel, rehearing of the appeal would amount to review of the order -Annexure P -2. Since no po,wer of review has been granted to the Director under the Act, the appeal could not be directed to be reheard. Mr. Narula, on the other hand, submitted that the State Government has all the powers under Section 7 of the Haryana Aided Schools (Security of Service) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) to pass order, in the interest of justice, Learned counsel has also submitted that this writ petition deserves to be dismissed as at the time of filing of the writ petition, the Management of the School was not approved by the Director as required under Rule 2 of the Haryana Aided Schools (Security of Service) Rules, 1974. Since the Management had not been approved, no resolution could have been passed in filing the present writ petition. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for parties anxiously.
(3.) RESPONDENT No. 3 joined the service of the petitioner -School as J.B.T. Teacher on 19.9.1974. His services were terminated by order dated 16.10.84, after conducting a departmental enquiry. The charges were found to have been proved against respondent No. 3. As the order of dismissal of an employee of an aided school can only take effect on confirmation by the District Education Officer, the necessary application was made by the petitioner -Management, under Section 3(2) of the Act. By order dated 26.11.1984, the action taken by the petitioner -Management was approved by the District Education Officer, Jind. Respondent No. 3 filed an appeal against the order of termination before the appellate authority i.e. D.P.I., Haryana under Section 3(4) of the Act. This appeal was dismissed by order dated 20.1.1987 which was communicated to the petitioner on 3.2.1987. A perusal of this order shows that the objection raised by the petitioner -Management with regard to the appeal filed by respondent No. 3, being barred by limitation, was rejected, however, on merits, it was held that the respondent No. 3 was given adequate opportunities to defend himself. The allegations of malafide levelled against the petitioner were also rejected. It was held that respondent No. 3 has not been able to prove that the members of the Enquiry Committee were biased against him. Respondent No. 3 thereafter filed a civil suit challenging the orders dated 16.10.1984, 26.11.1984, 30.4.1984 and 3.2.1987. This suit was filed on 3.4.1987. The civil suit was dismissed on 14.12.1991. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the First Appeal which had also been dismissed. As noticed earlier, the Regular Second Appeal is pending adjudication in this Court. Inspite of having filed the aforesaid Civil Suit, respondent No.3 also made a representation to the Commissioner and Secretary, Government of Haryana, Education Department, for setting aside the order -Annexure P -2 passed in the appeal which had been preferred by respondent No.3 against the order of the D.E.O. approving the action taken by the petitioner -Management. Exercising its power under Section 7 of the Act, the Commissioner and Secretary to Government of Haryana, Education Department on 17.5.1990, has passed the following order : - "Under Security of Service Act, 1971, Section (7), the appeal of Shri Rattan Singh, JBT Teacher is ordered to be reheard by Director Education, Haryana." Section 7 of the Act is as under : - "Power to make rules 7. If any difficulty arises in giving effect to the provisions of this Act, the State Government may, by order do anything not inconsistent with such provisions which appears to it to be necessary or expedient for the purpose of removing the difficulty.";