Asha Rani vs Managing Committee St. Angels ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 4159 Del

$~13
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      W.P.(C) 3525/2016 & CM No.15061/2016
       ASHA RANI                                      ..... Petitioner
                         Through : Ms. Indrani Ghosh with
                         Ms. Nidhi Jacob, Advocates

                         versus

       MANAGING COMMITTEE ST. ANGEL'S SCHOOL & ORS
                                                    ..... Respondents
              Through : Mr. Rakesh Gautam with
              Mr.Prakash Bhardwaj, Advocates for R-1 to 3.
              Ms. Shakshi Popi, Advocate for R-4.

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
                    ORDER

% 30.05.2016

1. The petitioner, who was working as a teacher in the respondent No.1/School and was charge-sheeted, vide order dated 19.5.2015, pursuant whereto inquiry proceedings have been initiated against her, has assailed the proceedings dated 7.4.2016 conducted by the respondent No.3/Inquiry Officer and has sought directions to the respondent No.3/Inquiry Officer to recuse himself from the inquiry proceedings on the ground of bias.

2. It may be relevant to note that apart from the petitioner herein, ten other petitioners, who have all been charge-sheeted by the respondent No.1/School, have filed separate petitions praying inter alia that the petitioner herein, who has been appointed by them as their Defence Assistant, may be permitted to appear before the Inquiry Officer.

3. Though a counter affidavit in opposition to the present petition has been filed by the respondents No.1 to 3, counsel for the said respondents states that to avoid any further delay in the inquiry proceedings, the school would not have any objection if the petitioner herein, Ms. Asha Rani, being deputed as a Defence Assistant for all the other petitioners in the inquiries being held against them.

4. In view of the said submission, the said petitions have been disposed of with permission granted to Ms. Asha Rani to appear as a Defence Assistant for each of the petitioners in respect of their respective disciplinary proceedings.

5. As for the present petition, it has been agreed by the parties that since the petitioner herein will be appearing as a Defence Assistant for the other ten teachers before the Inquiry Officer effective from 10.6.2016, it would be appropriate if the proceedings initiated against her are deferred for a reasonable time.

6. Counsel for the petitioner states that she shall not have any objection to continuation of the same Inquiry Officer as the inquiry proceedings in the present case are at the stage of cross examining the management witnesses.

7. In view of the said submission, the present petition is disposed of, while directing that the inquiry proceedings in respect of the petitioner shall be deferred till 30.7.2016. However, keeping in mind that the inquiry proceedings in respect of the petitioner were initiated by the respondent No.1 in the month of May, 2015 and the same have yet to be concluded after expiry of one year, the Inquiry Officer shall expedite the said proceedings and conclude the same preferably within two months reckoned from 1.8.2016.

8. The writ petition is disposed of, along with the pending application.

HIMA KOHLI, J MAY 30, 2016 sk/ap