Violations of the principles of natural justice.

Under the scheme formulated by the Government to relieve unemployment among the educated classes, Local Boards were encouraged to establish schools in villages which would provide employment for teachers. One of the schools so established was at Kunnangalpalayam in Palladam taluk in Coimbatore District. The sanctioned strength of that school was one teacher. On 13th March, 1955, the President of the District Board, Coimbatore, appointed the petitioner to that post, and the petitioner took charge of his post on 18th March, 1955.

On 15th June, 1955 the Junior Deputy Inspector of Schools, Palladam, inspected the school. He recorded certain irregularities and recommended the removal of the petitioner from his office. Apparently the District Education Officer was also of the same view. On receipt of the report and recommendations of the Educational authorities the President of the District Board issued his order dated 2nd August, 1955, the relevant portion of which ran:

"The Deputy Inspector of Schools, Palladam range during visit at Board Elementary School Kunnangalpalayam, has pointed out serious irregularities upon the teacher R. Sreenivasan and passed adverse remarks that the teacher is unfit to be a headmaster in a single teacher school. The remarks of the Deputy Inspector prove that it is highly dangerous to let the teacher continuing in the school. As recommended by the District Educational Officer, Coimbatore, the teacher R. Sreenivasan is ordered to be removed from service."

On receipt of this order the petitioner handed over charge of his office to his successor on 8th August, 1955. The petitioner claimed that he repeatedly wrote to the President on 8th August, 1955, 23rd August, 1955, 30th August, 1955, 13th September, 1955, 6th October, 1955 and 22nd November, 1955, asking for particulars of the charges against him and for a copy of the report of inspection of the Deputy Inspector, on the basis of which the petitioner had been removed from service. The respondent admitted receipt only of the letters dated 13th September, 1955 and 22nd November, 1955, which the petitioner had sent by registered post. Some of the other letters were sent by ordinary post, but the petitioner obtained certificates of posting. At any rate the receipt of the letters dated 13th September, 1955 and 22nd November, 1955 was admitted. On 10th October, 1955, the President ordered the payment of the arrears of salary due to the petitioner. The President vouchsafed no reply to the request of the petitioner to inform him of the charges and to furnish him with copies of the relevant records.

The petitioner applied under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari to set aside the order of the President dated 2nd August, 1955.

From what I have set out above it should be clear that the removal of the petitioner from service was ordered as a punishment, imposed on him on charges of inefficiency and irregularities in the discharge of his work. It should also be clear that at no time before 2nd August, 1955, did the President communicate to the petitioner any charges formulated by the President on the basis of the Inspection Report. Nor even was a copy of the Inspection Report furnished to the petitioner. The petitioner was given no opportunity to formulate his defence and to have it considered before the punishment of removal from service was imposed on him. That even subsequent to 2nd August, 1955, his repeated requests for information were left unanswered did not improve the position taken by the President.

In paragraph 5 of the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent the salient features of the Inspection Report were summed up:

" .... he (the Junior Deputy Inspector of Schools) noticed that the petitioner Mr. R. Srinivasan was not properly attending to the school work but was actually chitchatting with some laymen who had come there to while away their time, that the petitioner had made the School a rendezvous of idle-