JUDGMENT

Jyoti Singh, J.

1. By this writ petition, Petitioner assails the impugned order dated 29.11.2016 passed by the learned Delhi School Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as `DST') in Appeal No. 17/2011 as also to set aside the impugned orders dated 14.03.2011 and 18.03.2011 passed by Respondent No. 1/Cambridge Foundation School (hereinafter referred to as the `School'). Writ of mandamus is sought directing the School to reinstate the Petitioner with all consequential service benefits. Respondent No. 3 is Director of Education (hereinafter referred to as the `DoE').

2. Facts to the extent necessary and as captured in the writ petition are that Petitioner was appointed as Lab Assistant in the School in 1984 and subsequently as TGT (Science) in 1988. Since the date of his joining till December, 2009, there were no complaints against the Petitioner and the results of the students in classes taught by him were consistently good. Upon implementation of 6th CPC w.e.f. 01.01.2006, pay scales of the School employees including the Petitioner were revised but the School did not release arrears of salaries/emoluments, despite repeated demands. Several letters were written by the Petitioner in this regard but to no avail. This triggered the School making false allegations against the Petitioner in an endeavour to dispense with his services.

3. As per the case set up by the Petitioner, in the academic session 2009-2010, Petitioner was assigned four classes viz. VII-E, VIII-C, IX-B and IX-D for teaching Mathematics subject. The total strength of the School then was 1932 students with a ratio of 3:1 between boys and girls. Classes assigned to the Petitioner were on the first floor of the School building and were equipped with CCTV cameras with recording facility.

4. On 15.12.2009, Petitioner while taking a class test in Class VIII-C found one girl namely, XXX (name is being omitted to maintain confidentiality) copying from homework notes. On noting this, Petitioner stopped her and acting as a guide and mentor, advised her not to repeat the act of cheating, in the interest of her career. Petitioner also apprised the Principal of the incident on 18.12.2009. On 23.12.2009, Petitioner was called by the Principal in her office where the Chairperson, the Principal herself and Manager of the School Ms. Meena Malik were already present along with three other Teachers namely, Ms. Asha Sarin, Ms. Seema Kapoor and Ms. M. Daur. Petitioner was questioned on some complaints allegedly made against him by girl students of class VIII and father of one student XXX. Petitioner had no knowledge of the Preliminary Enquiry Committee (`PEC') being set up comprising of the said three teachers or of any complaints and on being shown the complaints, though not handed over, Petitioner categorically denied the allegations, being false. Preliminary inquiry (`PE') was conducted by the 3 teachers in the presence and dictates of the Chairperson, Principal and Manager and neither the girl students/alleged complainants nor the parent alleged to have made the complaint were present when the Petitioner was called.

5. On the next day i.e. 24.12.2009, a show cause notice was handed over to the Petitioner levelling false allegations of holding hands of girl students and molestation, misbehaviour etc. Petitioner requested the Chairperson on 29.12.2009 to supply the documents to enable him to respond to the show cause notice. However, instead