Allahabad High Court
Maksood Ahmed vs U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad And 3 ... on 3 August, 2022
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 37
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7702 of 2022
Petitioner :- Maksood Ahmed
Respondent :- U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Safdar Ali Kazmi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State Counsel for respondents 2 and 4 and Mr.Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 3.
Petition has been filed assailing order dated 21.04.2022 whereby salary payment to petitioner has been stopped pending enquiry into the complaint that he had obtained employment on the basis of forged educational documents.
Earlier vide order dated 20.5.2022, the following order had been passed:-
"Heard Mr. Syed Safdar Ali Kazmi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3 and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by the order impugned, the payment of salary of the petitioner has been stopped from 22.04.2022 on the ground that B.P.Ed certificate of the petitioner is forged. The order impugned has been passed without waiting for the decision of the inquiry and without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. He further submits that earlier, while examining the issue, the writ Court vide order dated 11.01.2012 observed that the document of the petitioner having the Degree of B.P.Ed was not found to be a forged one.
The Special appeal was filed against the order dated 11.01.2012, which was dismissed in default on 31.08.2015. After the aforesaid, the petitioner moved an application for compliance of order dated 11.01.2012 and when nothing was done, the contempt petition was filed, after which the petitioner was being given salary since January, 2018. Therefore, the order impugned passed stopping the salary of the petitioner without giving any opportunity of hearing and without waiting for the completion of the inquiry in this regard is arbitrary.
Learned counsel for respondent no.3 submits that the order passed by writ Court in favour of the petitioner was challenged by means of filing the special appeal and the Division Bench of this Court was pleased to stay the order dated 11.01.2012. The inquiry with respect to the certificate of B.P.Ed as obtained by the petitioner is going on. He prays for and is granted two weeks' time to obtain instructions in the matter with respect to the inquiry as regards the certificate of the petitioner.
Put up as fresh on 06.07.2022. "
Pursuant to aforesaid directions, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 3 on the basis of written instructions submits that enquiry proceedings are still ongoing without any conclusivity. Since the facts in the present matter are undisputed, as such filing of counter affidavit is being dispensed with and the impugned order is being adjudicated at the admission stage on the basis of which it has been passed in terms of judgment passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi & others, reported in AIR 1978 SC 851.
Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record particularly the impugned order, it is evident that salary payment to petitioner for the post of Assistant Teacher in the institution concerned has been stopped only on the ground of a complaint having been made against him which is still being enquired into and has not yet attained finality.
Learned counsel for respondents have been unable to demonstrate any provisions of law whereunder salary payment to petitioner can be stopped pending enquiry particularly when employer-employee relation is still subsisting. The U.P. Junior High Schools (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1978, which is applicable upon the petitioner, does not contain any provision for stopping of salary pending an enquiry.
In view of aforesaid, it is apparent that impugned order has been passed against the statutory provisions of law and is, therefore quashed by issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari. A further writ in the nature of Manamus is issued commanding respondent no.3 to make payment of salary to petitioner with arrears with effect from the date of passing of impugned order within a period of four weeks from the date a copy of this order is produced before the concerned authority. Such payment of salary, however, shall be dependent upon the final conclusion of the enquiry proceedings.
Resultantly, the petition succeeds and is allowed.
Order Date :- 3.8.2022
kvg/-
