Virender Kumar Goel vs The Director Of Education And Ors.
2002 Latest Caselaw 130 Del

JUDGMENT

Sanjay Kishan Kaul. J.

1. Rule.

2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal.

3. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 7.2.97 passed by respondent No. 3 suspending the petitioner in view of the allegations against the petitioner of leakage of question papers. After the memorandum to hold the enquiry was issued on 11.4.97, respondents 2 and 3 addressed letter dated 10.3.1998 to respondent No. 1 requesting to provide a nominee to constitute the disciplinary authority committee as per rule 118 of the Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973. Though this was the correct procedure. Learned counsel for the respondent states that respondent No. 1 filed to nominate any person and as a consequence thereof the enquiry proceedings did not continue. Learned counsel for the respondent has further drawn my attention to a letter dated 1.11.96 addressed by the petitioner to respondent No. 3 admitting to his guilt.

4. Be that as it may the enquiry must be taken to its logical conclusion and a finding must be arrived at while taking into consideration whatever admission may have been made by the petitioner.

5. There is no doubt that the enquiry proceedings have been dragged on for a long period of time because of the failure of respondent No. 1 to nominate their nominee.

6. In view of the aforesaid a direction is issued to respondent No. 1 to nominate their nominee to constitute the disciplinary authority committee as per rule 118 of the Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973 so that disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner can proceed. Such a nomination should be made by respondent No. 1 within a period of 4 weeks from today. The enquiry shall proceed expeditiously and every endeavor should be made to complete the enquiry within four months thereafter. The petitioner shall cooperate and join the proceedings.

7. In view of the nature of allegations made against the petitioner I am of the considered view that it will not be expedient at this stage to quash the order of suspension and the only direction which should be issued is in the aforesaid terms to expedite the matter.

8. Needless to say that the petitioner will be paid all admissible amounts while he is under suspension and the arrears, if any, shall be paid to him within a period of four weeks from today.

9. Writ petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

CM/3974/2000

10. In view of the orders passed in the writ petition, application becomes infructuos and is dismissed.