Prem Sagar Pandey vs State Of U.P. Through Prin. Secy. ...
2018 Latest Caselaw 1560 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

A.F.R. 
 
Court No. - 23
 

 
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 4540 of 2015
 

 
Petitioner :- Prem Sagar Pandey
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Prin. Secy. Secondary Edu. Deptt. Lko.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Dr. Lalta Prasad Mishra, Ateequzzaman Siddiqui, Shailendra P.Sharma
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 
with
 
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 2373 of 2015
 

 
Petitioner :- C/M Shri Dev Darbar Ashram Inter College Thru Manager & Anr.
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Its Secy.Deptt.Of Secondary Edu.Lko.&Ors.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- A.Z. Siddiqui,Ram Prakash Pandey,Vidhu Bhushan Kalia
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 
with
 
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 4936 of 2015
 

 
Petitioner :- C/M Dev Darbar Ashram Inter College Through Manager Rakesh S
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Secy. Deptt. Of Secondary Edu. Lko. &
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- A.Z.Siddiqui
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Prafulla Tiwari,R.K.S.Suryavanshi
 

 
Hon'ble Irshad Ali, J.

(1) Heard Sri Prafull Tiwari, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Shailendra Prasad Sharma on behalf of the petitioner, learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri A.Z. Siddiqui, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.5.

(2) The dispute in the aforesaid three writ petitions pertains to the initiation of disciplinary proceeding against the Principal- Prem Sagar Pandey. In two writ petitions, the Committee of Management has challenged the order of District Inspector of Schools revoking the order of suspension dated 10.07.2015, passed against the petitioner, whereby, the District Inspector of Schools has returned the proposal for grant of approval on the proposed punishment submitted by the Committee of Management. Writ Petition No.4540 (S/S) of 2015 pertains to payment of retiral dues and arrears of salary for a certain period and the same is treated to be main petition for deciding the controversy.

(3) Brief facts of the case are that Shri Dev Darbar Asram Inter College, Sandi, Hardoi is a recognized institution under the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The provisions of U.P. Act No.24 of 1971 in as much as provisions of U.P. Secondary Education (Services Selection Board) Act, 1982 and rules framed thereunder are applicable to the said institution.

(4) The petitioner is Principal of the aforesaid college. The Committee of Management initiated disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner by passing a resolution. The petitioner was placed under suspension on 04.08.2014 and ultimately the Inquiry Committee constituted in accordance with the regulations submitted inquiry report and on that basis the Committee of Management passed resolution on 28.06.2015 resolving to terminate the services of the petitioner and proposal for grant of prior approval, as required under Section 21 of the U.P. Act No.5 of 1982, papers were submitted before the District Inspector of Schools for its transmission under the provisions of Regulation of 1985.

(5) In the meantime, on attaining the age of superannuation, the petitioner retired from service on 30.06.2015 and on the proposal submitted by the Committee of Management for grant of approval, no approval was accorded by the Secretary, U.P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board, Allahabad.

(6) Therefore, in the light of aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner has filed this petition and submits that in case disciplinary proceedings initiated against a Principal or Teacher appointed in Intermediate College, there is no provision under the act and rules to continue the disciplinary proceedings in case of retirement of a Principal or Teacher.

(7) His next submission is that if without conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings a Principal or Teacher has retired, he is entitled for entire benefits as a Principal or Teacher of an Intermediate College. In support of this submission, he relied upon the judgment in the case of Bhagirathi Jena Vs. Board of Directors, O.S.F.C. and others [(1993) 3 Supreme Court Cases 666], wherein, the controversy in regard to the non-existence of provision in service rules for continuance of disciplinary proceedings after the retirement was under consideration, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has recorded in paragraphs 6, 7, 9 and 10 as under:

"6. It will be noticed from the abovesaid regulations that no specific provision was made for deducting any amount from the provident fund consequent to any misconduct determined in the departmental enquiry nor was any provision made for continuance of departmental enquiry after superannuation.

7. In view of the absence of such provision in the abovesaid regulations, it must be held that the Corporation had no legal authority to make any reduction in the retiral benefits of the appellant. There is also no provision for conducting a disciplinary enquiry after retirement of the appellant and nor any provision stating that in case misconduct is established, a deduction could be made from retiral benefits. Once the appellant had retired from service on 30.6.95. there was no authority vested in the Corporation or continuing the departmental enquiry even for the purpose of imposing any reduction in the retiral benefits payable to the appellant. In the absence of such authority, it must be held that the enquiry had lapsed and the appellant was entitled to full retiral benefits on retirement.

9. The question has also been raised in the appeal in regard to the payment of arrears of salary and other allowances payable to the appellant during the period he was kept under suspension and upto the date of superannuation. Inasmuch as the enquiry had lapsed, it is, in our opinion, obvious that the appellant would have to get the balance of the emoluments payable to him after deducting the suspension allowance that was paid to him during the abovesaid period.

10. The appeal is therefore allowed directing the respondent to pay arrears of salary and allowances payable to him during the period of suspension upto the date of superannuation after deducting the suspension allowance paid to him for the said period and also to pay the appellant, all the retirai benefits otherwise payable to him in accordance with the rules and regulations applicable, as if there had been no disciplinary enquiry or order passed there in."

(8) The judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court was duly followed in the case of Iliyas Ali in Writ Petition No.4076 (S/S) of 2011, wherein, the provisions contained under U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 was considered and this Court after considering the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and law decided by Hon'ble Apex Court as well as this Court, has held as under:

"Accordingly, in absence any provision in the Act, 1921 Rule or Regulation framed there in which governs the field for initiating or conducting the disciplinary proceedings after retirement of Teacher/Principal of the Intermediate Institution the competent/concerned authority after the retirement of a Teacher/principal cannot proceed to initiate or conduct the disciplinary proceedings after his retirement and the entire disciplinary proceedings if initiated would laps with the retirement.

For the foregoing reasons, once there is no specific provisions in the in the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 or Regulation framed thereunder for initiation of a disciplinary proceeding or continuing the disciplinary proceeding against petitioner who placed under suspension after his retirement then the action on the part of official respondents to withhold his post retiral dues is an action which is arbitrary in nature, thus, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India as well as principles of natural justice (See. Rajesh Kumar Saxena Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and others, [2007 1 ESC 648 (All) (DB)].

In the result, the writ petition is allowed with a direction to respondents to pay the petitioner his post retiral dues treating him to retire from the post of Principal, Jawahar Lal Nehru Inter College, Fatehpur Chaurasi, Unnao w.e.f. 30.06.2011 in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receiving certified copy of this order."

(9) In view of settled proposition of law, in the judgment referred hereinabove, it is recorded that a Principal or Teacher of an Intermediate College recognized under the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 in as much as in case of applicability of provisions of U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act, 1982 no disciplinary proceedings can go on after the retirement.

(10) By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner is claiming retiral benefits and arrears of salary for a certain period on the ground that disciplinary proceedings initiated against him has not been concluded by passing an order of punishment before his retirement dated 30.06.2015. Therefore, he is entitled for all service benefits on the post of Principal of the aforesaid institution.

(11) Accordingly, the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The respondents are directed to ensure payment of post retiral benefits and regular pension to the petitioner within a period of two months from today. In regard to payment of arrears of salary, the petitioner is permitted to make a comprehensive representation before the District Inspector of Schools within two weeks from today. In case such a representation is filed before the District Inspector of Schools, he is directed to decide the same within two months in the light of the observation and the judgment referred hereinabove. In case the petitioner is entitled for payment of arrears of salary, the same shall be paid within a period of three months from the date of passing of order by the District Inspector of Schools.

(12) Writ Petition No.2373 (S/S) of 2015 has been filed by Committee of Management challenging the order of revocation of suspension of the respondent No.5 dated 06.05.2015, on the following prayer:

i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 06.05.2015 passed by opposite party No.5 contained in Annexure-1 to this writ petition.

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the opposite parties not to interfere in the enquiry led by the Committee of Management against the opposite party No.5.

iii) Issue any other order or direction which this Hon'ble court may deem just and proper under the circumstances of the case.

iv) Award the costs of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner.

(13) In view of the judgment and order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.4540 (S/S) of 2015, this writ petition is finally disposed of.

(14) Writ Petition No.4936 (S/S) of 2015 : C/M Dev Darvar Ashram Inter College Through Manger Rakesh Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others has been filed on the following prayer:

(i) Issue a writ , order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 10.07.2015 passed by opposite party No.4 contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the opposite party No.3 to take decision/approval on the dismissal of opposite party No.5 referred by the Management Committee Shri Dev Darbar Ashram Inter college, Sandi, District Hardoi.

(iii) Issue any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper under the circumstances of the case.

(iv) Award the costs of the writ petition in favor of the petitioner.

(15) Vide impugned order dated 10.07.2015, the District Inspector of Schools has refused to accord approval to the proposal submitted by the Committee of Management for grant of approval to the proposed punishment under a disciplinary proceeding on the ground that the petitioner has retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.06.2015.

(16) In view of the finding recorded by this Court in Writ Petition No.4540 (S/S) of 2015 and in the light of the judgment rendered therein, the impugned order passed by the District Inspector of Schools does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. The order dated 10.07.2015, does not require any interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed.

Order Date :- 17.7.2018

Adarsh