By the Court—Heard Sri J.N. Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 10.2.2006 passed by the Director, Greator NOIDA Institute of Technology, Greator NOIDA district Gautam Budh Nagar placing the petitioner under suspension and initiating the disciplinary enquiry by constituting a disciplinary committee.

2. The facts stated in the writ petition reveals that Greator NOIDA Institute of Technology (hereinafter referred to as Institution) is an institution established in the year 2001 by Sri Ram Educational Trust. It has been recognized by the All India Council for Technology Education and affiliated to U.P. Technical University, Lucknow which has been established under Section 3 of the U.P. Technical University Act 2000 having jurisdiction over all technical institution through out the territory of State of U.P.. The management of the Greator NOIDA Institute of Technology is governed by the scheme of administration providing for a governing body consisting 10 members out of which three are nominees of All India Council for Technical Education and two are nominees of U.P. Technical University. The admission in the institution are made on the basis of the combined entrance test namely “U.P. Stale Engineering Examination” conducted by U.P. Technical University every year and the students of the institution appear and qualify the examination conducted by the U.P. Technical University where after they are awarded degree by the said university.

3. The petitioner was appointed by the Director of Institution vide letter dated 25.6.2004 as System Programmer in the department of computer science in the pay scale of Rs. 8000-13000. Clause IV of the appointment letter provides the following condition of appointment:

“Your services will be governed as per rules & regulations of the Institute in all matters.”

4. It appears that subsequently the petitioner was considered and appointed as Senior Lecturer on regular basis in the department of computer science w.e.f. 1.8.2005 vide order dated 8.7.2005 and was placed in the pay scale of Rs. 10000-15200. The terms and condition of the appointment includes condition No. 3 providing that his services would be governed as per rules and regulations of the Institute. The petitioner was required to convey his agreement for the terms and conditions of the appointment. It appears that on the allegations of unauthorized absence and dereliction of duty, the institute decided to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner >and by means of the impugned order dated 10.2.2006 he has been placed under suspension.

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the institution being an agency and instrumentality of the State, is an authority under Article 12 of the Constitution and hence the petition is maintainable in as much as the Apex Court in the case of Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka, AIR 1992 SC 1859, held that education is a fundamental right, the private institutions imparting education are the agencies of the state government and therefore, the institution in question is an “authority” under Article 12 of the Constitution of India and comes within the term “State”.

6. Sri J.N. Sharma further referred to the Apex Court judgment in the case of K. Krlshnamacharyulu and others v. Sri Venkateswara Hindu College of Engineering and another, 1997(3) SCC 571, in support of his contention that writ petition against order of suspension passed by respondent No. 3 is maintainable.

7. Having considered the above submission, however, we are not persuaded to accept the same. It is not disputed that Sri Ram Educational Trust is a private body which has established a technical institution in the year 2001 for imparting the technical education. In order to give status and authority to the certificates and degrees which the students of private educational institution would be entitled, the provisions for affiliation and recognition have been made an