USHA RANI SHALLEY OF AJMER Vs. M L BHATTACHARYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner Miss Usha Rani Shalley is that she was officiating as head mistress since July, 1952 in the Railway Bengali School, Ajmer under an agreement as per appendix 'x' of the Educational Code of the Uttar Pradesh. Leaving aside other matters which are not relevant, the case of the petitioner is that she was asked to explain certain alleged irregularities by the president of the Railway Bengali School Committee by letter of the 1st of September, 1956. She submitted a reply on the 5th of September, 1956. This was not considered satisfactory by the president and he intimated to the petitioner by a letter of the 12th of September, 1956 that she had been found guilty of the following charges: - (a) Deliberate negligence of duty. (b) Ignorance of rules of service and leave rules. (c) Insubordination. (d) Oppression and harassment to the members of the staff and the general public. (e) Adopting dishonest motives. (f) Inefficiency and incompetency. (g) Misrepresentation and breach of trust. It was added that "her case was under active consideration and the disciplinary action was to be taken against her and that as soon as it was decided, she would be informed of it and in the meanwhile, to hand over possession of all the documents pertaining to the school to the president and to act according to the instructions which might be issued to her so long as she was under suspension. " On the 22nd of October, 1956, she received a communication from the president, No. RBSPG/1/56 URS of that date "under the instructions from the Director of Education, State of Ajmer this is to inform you that your services have been terminated from this institution. " THE petitioner wrote to the president that the Director of Education had no authority to dispense with her services and that this could not also be done by the president himself. It is alleged that she made representation to the Director of Education but he ignored them. It was, therefore, prayed that the order of the termination of the services of the petitioner be set aside.