Radhey Shyam Mishra vs State Of U.P. And Others
2018 Latest Caselaw 2642 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

A.F.R.
 
Court No. - 6
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 43691 of 2005
 

 
Petitioner :- Radhey Shyam Mishra
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- S.D. Shukla
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sidharth Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Ashok Kumar,J.

Heard Sri S.D. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri S.K Mishra, learned standing counsel for the State-respondent and Sri Siddharth Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.5.

This writ petitioner is filed against the order passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh dated 17.4.2015 (Annexure 29 to the writ petition)

The petitioner has prayed for following reliefs :

"i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 11/12.4.2005 passed by District Inspector of Schools (Annexure No.29 to the writ petition)

ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 2.11.2002 passed by Deputy Director of Education (Annexure No.20 to the writ petition) whereupon the pension of the petitioner has been fixed as Rs.636/-.

iii) issue a writ, order or direction in the suitable nature commanding the respondents to release the salary of petitioner w.e.f. April 1981 along with interest as determined by this Hon'ble Court and further commanding the respondents to fix pension of the petitioner on the basis of salary which were being paid to the petitioner on 31.7.2000.

iv) issue any other suitable writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.

v) award the costs of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner."

Brief facts of the case are that in the institution of respondent no.5 namely, Janta Inter College, Ahraula, District Azamgarh, which is governed by the provisions as contained in U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and Regulations framed therein, the petitioner had been appointed as an Assistant Teacher and had been discharging the duties in the said capacity. The said institution is also on the grant in aid list of the State Government and the provisions of U.P. High School and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salary to Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1971 are fully applicable to the said institution.

The claim of the petitioner is that after the institution in question was accorded recommendation in the year 1971, the petitioner was transferred to the post of librarian and his appointment was duly approved by the District Inspector of Schools. On the post of librarian the petitioner continued to function on monthly salary paid to the petitioner as was paid to the Assistant Teacher.

A First Information Report was lodged on 5.1.1982/3.5.1982 under Section 408, 409, 467 and 420 I.P.C. In pursuance of the first information report the petitioner was placed under suspension and in his place another person was appointed and his appointment was limited till the petitioner returned back and resumed duties.

The petitioner has faced the trial in the above criminal case and he was acquitted by the Court of law by a judicial order which is passed by the Judicial Magistrate on 5.11.1999.

It is admitted by all parties that no challenge was made of the order dated 5.11.1999 therefore, the same became final in between the parties as such the same attain finality.

According to the petitioner he has moved an application on 16.12.1999 with a request that he may be permitted to join the institution and further to ensure the payment of his salary. It is transpired that initially the said request of the petitioner was refused or the same was turned down but subsequently on a separate register the petitioner was permitted to sign. Unfortunately on account of non-positive approach the petitioner was compelled not to join the post of the librarian and in fact it appears that one Jaswant Singh continued on the said post of librarian and the petitioner attained superannuation on 31.7.2000.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that various representations were filed by the petitioner for ensuring the retiral benefits as well as arrears of the salary. On such representations being moved by the petitioner, the District Inspector of Schools asked the management to ensure compliance of the judicial order passed by the Judicial Magistrate dated 5.11.1999 by which the petitioner was acquitted. This order of the District Inspector of Schools was on the representation of the petitioner.

It is also transpired that a direction was issued on 25.1.2001 by which the Committee of Management/ Principal of the institution had forwarded the papers of the pension, but no papers were submitted by the Committee of Management and the District Inspector of Schools transmitted the entire papers to the Deputy Director of Education but on 23.2.2001 by which he asked for detailed report. It is also transpired that the principal and management committee of the institution did not submit any query whatsoever and as far as the petitioner is concerned, he had been representing the matter for ensuring the payment of retiral benefits and when nothing was done, having no way out, the petitioner in compelling circumstances approached this Court by filing the Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 14506 of 2002 by which relief was sought for grant of retiral benefits and arrears of salary.

The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 11.4.2002 by which the direction was issued to the authorities concerned to take a decision and pass an appropriate order in detail within a period of three months.

According to the petitioner, in pursuance of the order passed by this Court dated 11.4.2002 a detailed representation was submitted however, nothing was done, and having no way a contempt petition was filed before this Court and this Court vide order dated 12.5.2003 granted one month time to respondent to comply with the order of this Court and in pursuance of order of contempt dated 12.5.2003 the District Inspector of Schools has passed an order dated 28.6.2003.

By the order dated 28.6.2003 the District Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh has rejected the claim of the petitioner by holding that since the petitioner was absent since 1981 and further that during the period of his suspension the services of one Jaswant Singh was availed and the salary was being paid to Sri Jaswant Singh, there remains no reason to permit the petitioner on the post of librarian, which was already filled up.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance on an order passed by the Deputy Director of Education, Azamgarh Region Azamgarh dated 2.11.2002 by which the Deputy Director of Education has fixed the pension of the petitioner for a sum of Rs.636/- per month. The petitioner therefore has challenged both the orders passed by the Deputy Director of Education as well as of the District Inspector of Schools dated 2.11.2002 and 28.6.2003 respectively before this Court by means of the Writ Petition No. 42104 of 2003.

The aforesaid writ petition being Writ Petition No. 42104 of 2003 was heard and was allowed vide judgment and order dated 29.10.2004. For the reference it would be appropriate that, the order/judgment dated 29.10.2004 be reproduced :

"Brief facts giving rise to instant writ petition is that in the District of Azamgarh, there is an institution known as Janta Inter College, Ahiraula, Azamgarh. The said institution is governed by the provisions as contained under U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and Regulations framed thereunder. The said institution is also on the grant-in-aid list of the State Government, and the provisions of U.P. High Schools and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salary to Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1971 are fully applicable to the said institution. Petitioner had been appointed as Assistant Teacher and had been discharging duties in the said capacity. Petitioner submits that after the institution in question was accorded recognition in the year 1971, the petitioner was transferred to the post of Librarian, and his appointment was duly approved by the District Inspector of Schools. Petitioner continued to function as such and monthly salary was also paid to him. Against petitioner a First Information Report was lodged on 15.01.1982/3.5.1982 under Sections 408, 409, 467 and 420 I.P.C. Thereafter on 21.1.1982 petitioner was placed under suspension and in his place another person was appointed and his appointment was limited till petitioner returned back and resumed duties. In the criminal case, wherein petitioner had been tried, order of acquittal had been passed by the Judicial Magistrate on 5.11.1999. The said order of acquittal had not been challenged and attained finality. After the said judgment petitioner on 16.12.1999 approached the institution and requested to permit him to join the institution and for ensuring payment of salary, initially request of petitioner was turned down, but subsequently on a separate register, he was allowed to sign. Thereafter on 30.7.2000, petitioner attained the age of superannuation petitioner submitted various representations for ensuring retiral benefits and arrears of salary. On such representations being moved, District Inspector of Schools sought legal advice in the matter and on 17.8.2000, District Inspector of Schools asked the management to ensure compliance of the order dated 5.11.1999 passed on the representation moved on behalf of petitioner. On 25.01.2001 directives were issued to the Committee of Management/ Principal of the institution to forward the papers in respect to pension, but no papers were submitted by the Committee of Management and the District Inspector of Schools transmitted the entire papers to the Deputy Director of Education, who on 23.2.2001 asked for detailed report. Principal and Management of the institution did not submit any query whatsoever, and as far as petitioner is concerned, he had been representing the matter for ensuring payment of retiral benefits and when nothing was done, Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 14506 of 2002 was filed seeking relief for grant of retiral benefits and arrears and when nothing was done, Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 14506 of 2002 was filed seeking relief for grant of retiral benefits and arrears of salary. This Court on 11.4.2002 disposed of writ petition directing the authorities concerned to pass appropriate order within three months. Pursuant to aforesaid order a detailed representation was submitted and when nothing was done, contempt petition was preferred, and this Court on 12.5.2003 accorded on month's time to respondents to comply with the order of the court. Thereafter impugned order has been passed.

Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of State and therein it has been contended that there shall be unnecessary burden on the State Exchequer and further against the post of petit6ioner on Jaswant Singh had been appointed and paid salary and further since July 1981 upto 31.7.2000 petitioner had not visited the institution and has also not furnished the details that he had not worked anywhere else and the action taken by respondent has been sought to be justified.

Disputing the claim set up in counter affidavit, rejoinder affidavit has been filed. As far as Committee of Management is concerned, on the matter being called out no one has turned up. Under Chapter VIII Rule 12 of the Rules of Court, service on the said respondent has been deemed to be sufficient.

After counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged, matter has been taken up for final disposal, with the consent of the parties.

Learned counsel appearing for petitioner, contended with vehemence that in the present case, petitioner is not at all on fault, in as much as on account of malafides of the then Principal of the institution petitioner was not allowed to work and F.I.R. Was lodged against him, and he had been placed under suspension. Once the ground on which proceeding had been initiated has become non-existent, then there was no legal impediment in ensuring payment of salary and retiral benefits in favour of petitioner.

Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand contended that as the petitioner had not at all worked as such he was not entitled to arrears of salary and pension and further on the post of petitioner another incumbent had been appointed and had been paid salary, as such the impugned order is justifiable.

On the basis of arguments advanced and pleadings available on record and from perusal of the impugned order factual position which is emerging is to the effect that there was misappropriation of funds in respect to G.P.F. Amount and the Principal of the institution Sri Sudhakar Lal Srivastava had lodged F.I.R. Against the petitioner. Petitioner was placed under suspension on 21.1.1982 and in his place one Jaswant Singh had been appointed with the rider that his appointment was till suspension of petitioner was revoked or till petitioner returned back. In the criminal case clear cut order of acquittal has been passed on 5.11.1999 and the said order has attained finality and the effect of the said judgment is that the ground on which petitioner had been placed under suspension had become non existent. After the said order has been passed, petitioner represented the matter on 16.12.1999 submits that he was not permitted to join but subsequently, he was allowed to sign the attendance register. District Inspector of Schools on 18.4.1983 had directed the Manager of the institution to permit the petitioner to discharge his duties and had also mentioned in regard to false implication of petitioner. Petitioner, he cannot be faulted in the present case as situation was self creation of the Committee of Management of the institution in not permitting the petitioner to perform his duties. The questions, as to whether pursuant to letter dated 18.4.1983, petitioner had reported for duties or not and whether petitioner was prepared to serve or not, are questions of fact and were to be adjudicated by the District Inspector of Schools, District Inspector of Schools while passing order dated 28.6.2003 has not at all adjudicated on this aspect of the matter and has totally ignored letter dated 18.4.1983. Adjudication of all these questions was relevant for the purpose of determination of question of arrears of salary, inasmuch as in case petitioner was not at on fault, then certainly he was entitled for the benefits, but if he was at fault, then certainly he was not at all adverted itself on this aspect of the matter in its correct perspective, as such order dated 28.8.2003 passed by District Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh deserves to be quashed.

Consequently, writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The matter is remitted back to the District Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh for being decided afresh after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the Committee of Management of the institution, within three months from the date of receipt a certified copy of this judgment."

After the judgment of this Court dated 29.10.2004 the petitioner has approached the District Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh and has placed the entire documentation along with certified copy of the order dated 29.10.2004. A copy of the said application sent by the petitioner addressed to the District Inspector of Schools is enclosed as Annexure-22 to the writ petition. After receiving the said representation/letter, which is placed by the petitioner on 18.11.2004, the respondent no.3, District Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh has passed the impugned order dated 17.4.2005 by which the claim of the petitioner was rejected and it is held that since the petitioner was absent during the period of inquiry and the criminal proceedings was going on, he is not entitled to get any salary, as such his claim is baseless and therefore is rejected.

Present writ petition is filed against the order of D.I.O.S. Dated 17.4.2005.

Learned standing counsel has filed his counter affidavit to the writ petition. In para 4 of the counter affidavit following averments are made :

"In the year 1983 the petitioner was suspended due to his involvement in embezzlement of the G.P.F. Fund of the employees and teachers of the institution, and due to embezzlement the services of the petitioner were suspended and thereafter he was terminated. The approval was also accorded by the then District Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh for his termination. It is stated that no writ or suit was filed by the petitioner and to stay order was obtained against the suspension and termination orders. Due to his termination of service the post fell vacant and in his place one Sri Jaswant Singh was appointed in the year 1983 and the approval was accorded by the District Inspector of Schools about the appointment of Sri Jaswant Singh and he is still working and discharging duties of Librarian in the institution. Allegations to the contrary are incorrect and are denied."

The crux of the contents made in para 4 of the counter affidavit are that since the petitioner has neither challenged the suspension nor the termination order, the post fell vacant, was filled up by placing one Jaswant Singh who was appointed in the year 1983 and the approval was accorded by the District Inspector of Schools for the appointment of Sri Jaswant Singh who was working and has discharged the duties as librarian in the respondent no.5 institution.

Learned standing counsel Sri S.K. Mishra has referred the contents of para 17 of the counter affidavit filed by Jai Prakash Srivastava, Deputy Director, Madhyamik Education, Azamgarh Region. For the ready reference the relevant contents of para 17 of the counter affidavit are mentioned hereinbelow :

"It is also pertinent to make it clear that there is only one post of Librarian in the institution and on that very basis one Sri Jaswant Singh has been appointed in the year 1983 and the approval has been accorded by the D.I.O.S. Since then Sri Jaswant Singh is working and discharging his duties of Librarian in the institution. Sanction for two posts of Librarians have not been given by the State Government, and therefore, salary of the petitioner could not be given in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Since the petitioner has been terminated from service in the year 1981 and the termination order of the petitioner has not been set aside by any competent court, and therefore, his termination order remained to be intact and termination has not been revoked by any court, therefore, the petitioner cannot claim the salary of the period from which he was terminated from service. It is also to make it clear that after acquittal order the petitioner has not been reinstated in service, and therefore, in view of the provisions of Rule 18 Ka of the Pension Rules, since the service of the petitioner has not been found to be satisfactory and the same has not been approved by the Controlling Authority and as such the petitioner could not be said to be reinstated in service and could not get the salary of the petitioner of the period of which he has been terminated. Allegations to the contrary are incorrect and denied."

Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the averments of para 5 of the rejoinder affidavit which is the reply to the contents of the para 4 of the counter affidavit, which is quoted hereinbelow :

"That the contents of paragraph no.4 of the counter affidavit are wrong, incorrect and are denied as stated therein. It is submitted that the petitioner has been charged in the criminal case pursuant to the First Information Report lodged by the Principal of the institution in order to escape himself from the financial irregularities which has become final by the order dated 15.11.1999 passed by the Judicial Magistrate. The said action was taken against the petitioner in order to appoint somebody else with ulterior motive consequently the appointment of Sri Jaswant Singh was granted without initiating any disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner. It is also relevant to point out that the averment made in paragraph under reply with regards to termination of services of the petitioner is totally false and fabricated, even the copy of alleged termination has not been enclosed in support of the averment made in paragraph under reply and the appointment of Sri Jaswant Singh was subject to the joining of the petitioner which has repeatedly been denied by the Principal and management Committee of the institution despite of the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate dated 5.11.1999 and the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 16.12.1999 followed by another representation dated 14.2.2000 and no justification exists to fix retiral benefits of the petitioner on the basis of last salary drawn in the year 1981."

Learned standing counsel has also placed the contents made in para 17 of the counter affidavit. In rejoinder affidavit the reply is submitted in para 14 and the relevant extract of the same is quoted hereinbelow :

"It is submitted that the entire averment made in paragraph under reply is based upon incorrect statement of facts. It transpires that the averment made in paragraph under reply is based upon hearsay statement of the respondent no.2 without having legal authority at all in order to escape himself from the liability and to harass the petitioner with malafide intention and ulterior motive which is not justified in the eye of law. It is reasserted that the petitioner has been victim of the conspiracy in collusion with the then Principal of the institution as well as the answering respondent while terminating the retiral benefits of the petitioner. The full and detail facts in this regard have already been asserted in the preceding paragraphs and any averment contrary to that are incorrect and are denied."

Learned standing counsel has placed reliance on the supplementary counter affidavit filed on 22.5.2015, which is filed by one Krishna Pal Singh, District Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh. The contents which are referred of para 5 and 8 of the supplementary counter affidavit are quoted hereinbelow :

"5. That, thereafter petitioner was suspended by the Manager of the institution on 21.01.1983 suspended the petitioner for his regular absence in service. It is further submitted that after completing the age of superannuation on 1.8.2000, the then Divisional Deputy Director of Education (Secondary) by his order dated 1.11.2002 and 2.11.2002 sanction the pension of petitioner. However, petitioner filed a writ petition no. 42104 of 2003 in which order dated 29.10.2004 was passed an in compliance thereof the then District Inspector of School by order dated 12.04.2005 not granted approval for payment of his salary and other allowances regarding the period of his absence in service.

8. That in view of aforesaid query it is most humbly submitted that the office of District Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh was sifted in 1984 to the present place and the original records of the present case was searched so may times but yet same was not traced out. It is also most respectfully submitted that regarding the records relating to termination of the petitioner was also searched from the institution in question and in this regard the then District Inspector of School, Azamgarh wrote a letter on 4.9.2002 and in pursuance thereof the Principal of the institution informed the District Inspector of School by his letter dated 7.9.2002 provided several documents regarding suspension, approval letter of appointment of Mr. Jaswant Singh and the copy of petitioner's pension matter. For kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court a copy of letter dated 7.9.2002 of Principal, Janta Inter College, Ahraula, Azamgarh is being filed herewith and marked as Annexure No. S.C.A. 1 to this affidavit."

While considering the aforesaid supplementary counter affidavit this Court has also noticed that a letter is issued by the Manager/Principal of Janta Inter College, Ahraula, respondent no.5 addressed to the District Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh, which is enclosed as S.C.A.-1 and the contents of the said letter are little alarming, therefore, it would be necessary that the same be placed as a part of this judgment.

From bare perusal of the said letter, one can find out that the relevant record related to the present petitioner was reported to be misplaced in the office of the institution as well as in the office of District Inspector of Schools. This is the State of affairs. This Court proposes to pass an appropriate order directing the State Government to take an appropriate action against erring officials, who were supposed to maintain the said records.

Sri Siddharth Singh, learned counsel representing the respondent no.5, Committee of Management has placed reliance on counter affidavit filed by one Sri Brijesh Singh, who is elected Manager of Committee of Management, Janta Inter College, Ahraula, Azamgarh. Learned counsel representing the respondent no.5 has placed reliance on a letter dated 18.2.2000 addressed to the petitioner issued by the principal of the institution, Janta Inter College indicating and accepting therein that the petitioner has approached the respondent no.5 institution by means of a letter dated 16.2.2000 to provide him a copy of the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh dated 5.11.1999 and further requesting thereby to permit him to join on the post which he was holding before the order of suspension.

Surprisingly the Principal while issuing a letter dated 18.02.2000 has mentioned that since there is no direction issued by the Judicial Magistrate while acquitting the petitioner to permit him to take the charge hence, he cannot be allowed, however, in the interest of justice and following the principles of natural justice he was called/directed to appear in person on 21.02.2000 along with the documents.

Learned counsel representing the respondent no. 5 has also placed reliance on a letter signed and issued by the Principal, Janta Inter College, which is referred/addressed to the D.I.O.S., Azamgarh mentioning therein that since the petitioner completed the age of 60 year (superannuation) as such has not joined the service till his superannuation, which was on 31.07.2000 and since he is retired, therefore in the aforesaid background, the documents related to G.P.F. and Saving Insurance papers etc. are sent for verification. This letter is issued by the principal which is undated, however the same is received by some officer attached with the office of D.I.O.S., Azamgarh on 10.11.2000 (As reflects from the records).

Learned counsel for the institution respondent no. 5 has also referred and placed the letter issued by the Principal/Manager of the institution addressed to the D.I.O.S., Azamgarh dated 5.02.2001 referring therein the decision of the Judicial Magistrate dated 05.11.1999 and the legal opinion sought by him from the District Government Counsel and in pursuance thereto it is opined that since all the relevant papers are provided by the institution to the office of the D.I.O.S., (as referred in the letter dated 05.02.2001) and further it is mentioned that the objection raised by the office of D.I.O.S. was removed by the office of the institution, while issuing a letter dated 15.01.2001, and since a certificate was handed over to the petitioner on 15.01.2001, there remains no issue open.

Another letter which is enclosed as C.A.-4 issued by Manager/Principal of the Janta Inter College addressed to the D.I.O.S., Azamgarh dated 28.05.2001 relates to the claim of the petitioner with respect of his pension. The contents of the letter dated 28.05.2001 stipulate that the service record of the petitioner available with the Ex-Principal was not provided to the present Principal, who has issued this letter, details whereof are mentioned in the pensionary documents, which were allegedly issued earlier. Clause 2 of the said letter refers that the petitioner was absent throughout since July 1981 till his superannuation dated 31.07.2000 and since he never attended the college physically therefore his claim is unacceptable. Clause 3 of the said letter refers that the petitioner was appointed as librarian-cum-clerk and on account of allegation of embezzlement the petitioner never attended the college and the document related to the P.F. and G.P.F. are not returned by him, his claim is unsustainable.

It further refers that the service book was with the Ex-Principal/Employer therefore, the present principal is unable to provide the details with respect of leave availed by the petitioner and that at least the record related to the family pension nominees are already sent with two copies.

Annexure 5 of counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent College is a letter dated 01.11.2002 providing the details of the arrears.

Annexure 6 is an important letter which was sent by the Manager/Principal of the Janta Inter College addressed to the D.I.O.S., Azamgarh which is a letter dated 07.09.2002 details of which are referred in the earlier part of this judgment.

Learned counsel for the institution has pointed out that the Committee of Management has authorised one Sri Guru Prasad to hand over the written statement of the Committee of Management to the District inspector of schools, Azamgarh, as the same was desired and in the said written statement the respondent no. 5 has reiterated and reaffirmed its stand.

From the bare perusal of the aforesaid documents and the background which is narrated hereinabove, this Court find that the respondent no. 3 has acted in most arbitrary manner and in fact has not complied with the order passed by this Court and has proceeded on the basis of the report which he has sought which indicates that the relevant document related to the service of the petitioner are misplaced. This Court further finds that no inquiry was instituted at any point of time to find out the genuineness of the report stating that the documents are misplaced.

However this Court is of the opinion that it is nothing but clearly an abuse of process of law as well as misuse of power by the respondent no. 3, who has deliberately not allowed the petitioner to join the service after the decision of the Court of law in favour of the petitioner by which decision the petitioner was discharged from the allegations levelled against him.

In view of the aforesaid peculiar facts this Court has no option but to allow the writ petition and direct the District Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh to calculate the entire dues which are payable to the petitioner, treating the petitioner in the service on the post of librarian-cum-clerk. This Court further directs the D.I.O.S., Azamgarh to pay the interest at the rate of 7% on the amount payable/calculated to the petitioner from the date of this order that is from today.

This exercise of calculation and payment be completed by the D.I.O.S., Azamgarh within a period of three months from today. This Court finds it suitable that cost of Rs. 1 lakh be imposed against the State which the State is free to recover from the erring authorities.

The writ petition is allowed.

Order Date :- 18.09.2018

S.S.

.