Dr. Pradeep Kumar Agrawal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3666 MP

                                                 W.P. No.5105/2022

                              1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
                            BEFORE
     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
                   ON THE 15th OF MARCH, 2022
               WRIT PETITION No. 5105 of 2022
       Between:-
       DR. PRADEEP KUMAR AGRAWAL S/O
       LATE SHRI ATMA RAM AGRAWAL , AGED
       ABOUT    61  YEARS,   OCCUPATION:
       LECTURER,   GOVERNMENT     HIGHER
       SECONDARY SCHOOL, SARVAI, DISTRICT
       CHHATARPUR (M.P.)



                                                 .....PETITIONER
       ( SHRI MANOJ KUMAR SHARMA, LEARNED SENIOR
       COUNSEL WITH MS. SUPRIYA SINGH, COUNSEL FOR THE
       PETITIONER )

       AND
1.     THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
       THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
       DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION
       MANTRALAYA    VALLABH   BHAWAN,
       BHOPAL (M.P.)



2.     THE      COMMISSIONER,     PUBLIC
       INSTRUCTIONS,   DIRECTORATE    OF
       PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS GAUTAM NAGAR
       BHOPAL (M.P.)



3.     SECRETARY, BOARD OF        SECONDARY
       EDUCATION,    MADHYA         PRADESH,
       BHOPAL (M.P.)



4.     COLLECTOR,    DISTRICT-CHHATARPUR
       (M.P.)



5.     DISTRICT    EDUCATION        OFFICER
       DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (M.P.)



                                               .....RESPONDENTS
       (SHRI PRAVEEN NAMDEO, LEARNED GOVERNMENT
       ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENTS/STATE )
                                                        W.P. No.5105/2022

                                   2




      This petition coming on for admission and interim relief this

day, the court passed the following:

                              ORDER

In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

the petitioner has assailed the legality, validity and propriety of the

order dated 15.02.2022 (Annexure P/1), whereby the petitioner is

directed to show cause and also the order dt.18.02.2022 (Annexure

P/2) is under challenge, whereby the charge of Principal, Higher

Secondary School, Sarvai, District Chhatarpur, has been withdrawn

from the petitioner and the same has been handed over to one Shri

Rishi Tripathi, Lecturer.

2. The brief facts leading to filing of this petition are that the

petitioner was placed under suspension from 2009 to 2017. The

suspension was revoked after the intervention of this Court. As a

consequence, the petitioner joined the duty but no salary was paid

during July 2017 to December, 2020. From January, 2021 partly

sum of Rs.22,000/- is being paid as against entitlement of

Rs.1,15,000/- per month. In such an adverse situation, the petitioner

is facing mental, social and financial harassment and it has become

difficult to survive. The petitioner himself is physically

handicapped person and daughter of the petitioner is also suffering

from epilepsy by birth and she has to undergo regular treatment W.P. No.5105/2022

before Neuro Specialist. When the petitioner was working as

Principal in the Higher Secondary School, Sarvai, District

Chhatarpur, a letter dt.11.02.2022 has been issued by the District

Education Officer, whereby work has been allotted to the petitioner

as Superintendent/Centre In-charge for conducting Board

Examination. After knowing that his name is included in the list, the

petitioner filed a representation informing about the difficulty in

performing the duty as In-charge of the examination centre. Instead

of deciding the representation, a show cause notice has been issued

alleging that the petitioner has declined to perform duty as In-

charge of the examination centre. However, the petitioner replied to

the show cause notice on 18.02.2022 but suddenly like a bolt from a

blue the impugned order dt. 18.02.2022 has been passed

withdrawing the charge of Principal from the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned

order of withdrawing the charge of Principal from the petitioner is

stigmatic and predetermined in nature and on this ground alone, the

impugned orders deserves to set aside.

4. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate for the

respondents/State opposed the prayer and submitted that the

petitioner has no vested right over the additional charge of

Principal, which is of temporary nature, as is evident from the

order. There is no violation of any legal or fundamental right of the W.P. No.5105/2022

petitioner. The service condition of the petitioner is also not

changed by withdrawing the additional charge. It is further

contended that the petitioner has no right to ask for or stick to the

additional charge. The impugned order does not cause any financial

loss or prejudice of any kind to the petitioner. If the petitioner is

unable to discharge his duties efficiently, the authorities have

powers to replace him with another person, who can manage the

affairs properly. In support of his contention, he relied on the

judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case State of Haryana

Vs. S.M. Sharma & Ors. as reported in 1993 SCC supl. (3) 252.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

6. The impugned order is only an order withdrawing the

additional charge. Substantive post of the petitioner is Lecturer. The

petitioner was neither appointed/promoted to the post of Principal

nor he was reverted from the said post. He was only holding the

additional charge, which has been withdrawn.

7. This Court is of the considered view that the respondents are

within the powers to issue the impugned order dated 18.02.2022

(Annexure P/2) withdrawing the additional charge of Principal from

the petitioner. So far as the impugned order dt.15.02.2022

(Annexure P/1) is concerned, it is a settled legal position that Writ

Petition is not maintainable against a show cause notice.

W.P. No.5105/2022

8. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to exercise

the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution

of India. Accordingly, the instant petition deserves to be and is

hereby dismissed.

No order as to costs.

(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE Shanu

Digitally signed by SHANU RAIKWAR Date: 2022.03.16 17:53:54 +05'30'