1996 Supreme(All) 788

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
U. P. SINGH, SUDHIR NARAIN, R. H. ZAIDI
J.K.KALRA - Appellant
Versus
REGIONAL INSPECTRESS OF GIRLS SCHOOLS, MEERUT - Respondents
C. M. W. P. 4031 Of 1988
Decided On : 07/19/1996

Headnote:

Whether Section 16-G (3) (a) of U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, is applicable to a recognised and aided Govt. minority Institution which provides for taking approval of the Dist. Inspector of Schools in writing before discharging, removing, dismissing from service, reducing in rank or subjecting to any diminution in emoluments or terminating the service of a Teacher of a recognised Institution under the Act?

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, Smt. J. K. Kalra, was appointed as a teacher by the Committee of Management of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Girls Inter College, Saharanpur on 8/07/1954 and confirmed on the said post on 8/07/1955. On 22-5-1957 the petitioner was promoted as Principal of the College and was confirmed on the said post. In the year 1985, the petitioner took 6 months leave and went abroad. After expiry of the said leave she reported for duty but was not allowed to join. On a complaint dated 27-4-1985 received from District inspectress of Girls Schools, Saharanpur, against the petitioner, the Committee of Management resolved to conduct an inquiry. The inquiry Committee was set up, which submitted its report on 20-6-1985. Thereafter, a sub-Committee was formed to inquire into the allegations made against the petitioner. Petitioner was served with charge sheet, in reply to which the petitioner submitted her explanation. Petitioner was, thereafter, suspended by the Committee of Management. On receipt of the report of the Sub-Committee, a show cause notice was served upon the petitioner calling upon her to appear before the Committee of Management in its meeting scheduled to be held on 26-4-1986 and to show cause as to why she be not dismissed from service. Thereafter, on receipt of the reply of the petitioner, a resolution terminating the petitioner from service was passed on 10-5-1986, intimation of which was given to the petitioner on 12-5-1986, in writing. The petitioner, thereafter, according to her own case submitted a representation to Regional Inspectress of Girls Schools, Saharanpur as well as Secretary, Education Department, Lucknow and Dy. Director of Education, U. P. , Lucknow. She also claims to have filed an appeal before the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh against her dismissal.

Finding of the Court:

The question referred to above is redundant in view of change of law; and (iii) the reference made by learned single Judge was incompetent.

Issues: 1. Whether Section 16-G (3) (a) of U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, is applicable to a recognised and aided Govt. minority Institution which provides for taking approval of the Dist. Inspector of Schools in writing before discharging, removing, dismissing from service, reducing in rank or subjecting to any diminution in emoluments or terminating the service of a Teacher of a recognised Institution under the Act? 2. Whether the question referred to above is redundant in view of change of law? 3. Whether the reference made by learned Single Judge was incompetent.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The provisions of Section 16-G (3) (a) of the Act are violative of Article 30 of the Constitution of India and are not applicable to the minority institutions. 2. The U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Board Act, 1982, came into force with effect from 14/07/1981, except section 21, which came into force with effect from Ist January, 1984. Section 30 of the said Act exempts the minority institutions from application of the Act, therefore, the position that emerges after Ist January, 1984 is that for dismissal, removal, or reduction in rank of teachers the provision of Section 21 of the Commission Act will apply and according to Section 30 of the Commission Act, Section 21 will not apply to the minority Institutions. Thus the intention of the legislature is clear that no prior approval of either the District Inspector of Schools or the Commission and Selection Board is necessary, in case of dismissal, removal or reduction in rank etc. of teachers of the minority institutions. In my opinion Section 16-G (3) (a) of the Act stands impliedly repealed by Section 21 read with Section 30 of U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission and Selection Board Act, 1982. Reference was thus, for all practical purposes redundant. 3. The reference made by the learned Single Judge was incompetent.

Final Decision: The question referred to above is answered in affirmative. The writ petition shall now be decided on merit by the learned Single Judge.