The Commission has the power to modify the punishment recommended by the disciplinary authority under Regulation 8 of the U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission (Procedure for Approval of Punishment) Regulations, 1985.

( 1 ) THESE are two writ petitions in which common question of law and fact have been raised. It is, therefore, proposed to decide them together by this common judgment.

( 2 ) PUT briefly, the facts of the case are that Raja Ram Shukla, the petitioner in Civil Misc. Writ no. 35627 of 1995, who was Principal of Vinoba Inter College, Kamasin, district Banda was placed under suspension for reasons of financial irregularities, misconduct and insubordination by the Committee of Management (the petitioner in the Civil Misc. Writ No. 33649 of 1995) on 9. 11. 1992 pending departmental enquiry. A charge-sheet dated 22. 11. 1992 was served upon Sri shukla. A supplementary charge-sheet dated 5. 10. 1993 was also issued to him. Sri Raja Ram shukla submitted his replies to the two charge-sheets on 13. 8. 1993 and 25. 10. 1993. After conclusion of the enquiry, a report was submitted by the Committee of Enquiry on 30. 1. 1994. The Disciplinary Authority, i. e. , the Committee of Management, issued a show cause notice to sri Raja Ram Shukla to appear before the Committee of Management and submit his explanation. After taking into consideration the enquiry report, the material submitted therewith and the explanation of Sri Raja Ram Shukla, the Committee of Management passed a resolution on 13. 3. 1994 to dismiss him from service. The resolution of the Committee of Management and the relevant papers were forwarded to the U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission. However, the Commission did not approve the recommendation of the Committee of management to dismiss the petitioner of Writ Petition No. 35627/95, namely, Sri Raja Ram shukla. By order dated 4. 11. 1995, the Commission directed that Sri Raja Ram Shukla shall be reverted to the post of Lecturer, the post which he earlier held before his appointment as principal of the College. It is this order which had been challenged, on the one hand, by the committee of Management in Writ Petition No. 33649 of 1995 primarily on the ground that the commission was not empowered to substitute the punishment of reversion or reduction in rank in place of the punishment of dismissal from service, as recommended by the Committee of management, and that in view of the gravity of various charges established against Sri Raja Ram shukla, the only appropriate and suitable punishment was that of dismissal from service. On the other hand, Sri Raja Ram Shukla has challenged the order dated 4. 11. 1995 passed by the commission by filing Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35627 of 1995 primarily on the ground that since he was a direct recruit to the post of Principal, he could not be reverted to the lower post of lecturer and that no order of punishment could be passed against him as none of the charges have been established.

( 3 ) IN both the writ petitions, counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been exchanged. Sri Ashok khare, appearing on behalf of Sri Raja Ram Shukla and Sri Vijai Bahadur Singh, on behalf of the Committee of Management, have advanced full-dressed arguments on the merits of the case. Therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, both these writ petitions are being disposed of finally at the admission stage.

( 4 ) IT is an indubitable fact that Sri Raja Ram Shukla, who was working as Principal in Vinoba inter College. Kamasin, district Banda was suspended and proceeded against In a departmental enquiry Initiated against him on account of misconduct, serious financial Irregularities and insubordination. Various serious charges were established against him after due enquiry. The report of enquiry was taken into consideration by the Committee of Management, which is the disciplinary authority and it finally resolved on 13. 3. 1994, after taking into account the explanation of Sri Raja Ram Shukla that he deserves the extreme penalty of removal from service. As required under Section 21 of the U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission and selection Boards Act, 1982 (Ac