( 51 ) ON behalf of the respondents the stand taken by their learned counsel was that Mr. Manley or the Headmaster had no bias or prejudice against the petititioner and that they had been most considerate in their treatment of the petitioner and action was taken for terminating bis services in good faith and as a result of objective assessment of the deterioration in his efficiency, work and conduct. The Board was stated to have been kept fully informed at all stages and that the fact finding Committee to have been appointed under orders of the Board. It was submitted that Sarvshri G. K. Chandramani and P. Gangulee were rightly appointed as representatives of the Government on the Board and it was incorrect to say that (here was no quorum for the meeting of the Board held on February 10, 1967. In any event, it was urged, any defect in the nomination of any persons to act as members of the Board could not invalidate its proceedings by virtue of regulation 6. It was stated that no enquiry was required for taking action under rule 10 (ix) of the School Rules doe to the termination of services under that rule not being a penalty. The procedure adopted was mentioned to have been resorte

Click Here to Read the rest of this document