An order of suspension of the Head or a teacher of an institution does not lapse even if not approved by the Inspector within sixty days from the date of such order and it merely ceases to operate and becomes effective again after it is approved by the Inspector. The writ petition filed before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against an order of D. I. O. S. passed under Section 16-G (7) of the Act does not become infructuous after the expiry of sixty days from the date of the order of suspension and this Court has full power to pass appropriate order and issues appropriate direction in such matter.

Headnote:
INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION ACT - SUSPENSION OF PRINCIPAL OR TEACHER - APPROVAL BY DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS - WRIT PETITION - INFRUCTUOUSNESS - [SECTION 16-G (5), (6), (7), (8)] - An order of suspension of the Head or a teacher of an institution does not lapse even if not approved by the Inspector within sixty days from the date of such order and it merely ceases to operate and becomes effective again after it is approved by the Inspector. The writ petition filed before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against an order of D. I. O. S. passed under Section 16-G (7) of the Act does not become infructuous after the expiry of sixty days from the date of the order of suspension and this Court has full power to pass appropriate order and issues appropriate direction in such matter.
Fact of the Case:

A Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court referred two questions for decision by the Full Bench: (1) Whether the order of suspension of Principal or a teacher of an Intermediate College, if not approved by the District Inspector of Schools within sixty days from the date of such order, lapses or it merely ceases to operate and become effective after it is approved by the Inspector? (2) Whether writ petition challenging an order of the D. I. O, S. passed under Section 16-G (7) of the Act becomes infructuous and no relief can be granted even if the order of the D. I. O. S. is found to be bad?
Finding of the Court:

The Court held that an order of suspension of the Head or a teacher of an institution does not lapse even if not approved by the Inspector within sixty days from the date of such order and it merely ceases to operate and becomes effective again after it is approved by the Inspector. The Court also held that the writ petition filed before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against an order of D. I. O. S. passed under Section 16-G (7) of the Act does not become infructuous after the expiry of sixty days from the date of the order of suspension and this Court has full power to pass appropriate order and issues appropriate direction in such matter.
Issues: 1. Whether the order of suspension of Principal or a teacher of an Intermediate College, if not approved by the District Inspector of Schools within sixty days from the date of such order, lapses or it merely ceases to operate and become effective after it is approved by the Inspector? 2. Whether writ petition challenging an order of the D. I. O, S. passed under Section 16-G (7) of the Act becomes infructuous and no relief can be granted even if the order of the D. I. O. S. is found to be bad?
Ratio Decidendi: The Court interpreted Section 16-G (5), (6), (7), and (8) of the U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, and held that an order of suspension of the Head or a teacher of an institution does not lapse even if not approved by the Inspector within sixty days from the date of such order and it merely ceases to operate and becomes effective again after it is approved by the Inspector. The Court also held that the writ petition filed before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against an order of D. I. O. S. passed under Section 16-G (7) of the Act does not become infructuous after the expiry of sixty days from the date of the order of suspension and this Court has full power to pass appropriate order and issues appropriate direction in such matter.
Final Decision: The Court answered the questions referred to it as follows: (1) An order of suspension of the Head or a teacher of an institution does not lapse even if not approved by the Inspector within sixty days from the date of such order and it merely ceases to operate and becomes effective again after it is approved by the Inspector. (2) The writ petition filed before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against an order of D. I. O. S. passed under Section 16-G (7) of the Act does not become infructuous after the expiry of sixty days from the date of the order of suspension and this Court has full power to pass appropriate order and issues appropriate direction in such matter.

R. A. SHARMA, J.

A Division Beach of this Court has referred the following two questions for decision by the Full Bench :

(1) Whether the order of suspension of Principal or a teacher of an Intermediate College, if not approved by the District Inspector of Schools within sixty days from the date of such order, lapses or it merely ceases to operate and become effective after it is approved by the Inspector ?

(2) Whether writ petition challenging an order of the D. I. O, S. passed under Section 16-G (7) of the Act becomes infructuous and no relief can be granted even if the order of the D. I. O. S. is found to be bad ?

2. Section 16-G of U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) deals with the conditions of service of head of institu tions, teachers and other employees of the Intermediate Colleges. Its sub sections (5), (6), (7) and (8), which provide for suspension of head of institu tion or a teacher of such institution arc as under :

"16-G: (5) No Head of Institution or teacher shall be suspended by the management, unless in the opinion of the management-

(a) the charges against him are serious enough to merit his dis missal, removal or reduction in rank ; or

(b) his continuance in office is likely to hamper or prejudice the conduct of disciplinary proceedings against him ; or

(6) Where any Head of Institution or teacher is suspended by the Committee of Management, it shall be reported to the inspector within thirty days from the date of the commencement of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975, in case the order of suspension was passed before such commencement, and within seven days from the date of the order of suspension in any other case, and the report: shall contain such particulars as may be prescribed and accompanied by ail relevant documents.

(7) No such order of suspension shall, unless approved in writing by the Inspector, remain in force for more than sixty days from the date of commencement of Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975, or as the case may be, from the date of such order, and the order of the Inspector shall be final and shall not be questioned in any Court.

(8) If, at any time, the Inspector is satisfied that disciplinary pro ceedings against the Head of Institutions or teacher are being delayed, for no fault of the Head of Institution or the teacher, the Inspector may, after affording opportunity to the Management or make representation revoke an order of suspension passed under this section. "

Under sub-section (5) the Management of an Institution can suspend Head of the Institution or a teacher it is of the opinion that one of the grounds specified in clauses (a) to (c) of the said sub-section exists, Sub-section (6) requires the Management to submit the report regarding the suspension to the Inspector within time specified therein. Sub-section (7) has laid down that no order of suspension shall remain in force for more that sixty days from the date of such order, unless approved in writing by the

Inspector. Sub-section (8) empowers the Inspector to revoke the order of suspension, if he is satisfied that the disciplinary proceedings against the Head or the teacher of the Insti tution are being delayed without any fault on their part.

3. According to sub-section (7) no order of suspension shall "remain in force for more than sixty days" unless approved in writing by the Inspector. in force means in operation. A statutory enactment or an order does not lapse merely because it has not come or brought into force. The only effect of an order, which is not is force is that it is ineffective and inoperative. But such an order is not obliterated and continues to exist though ineffective. Similarly when the order, which was in force, has ceased to be operative due to supervising event, will come into force again an

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1995 Supreme(All) 267

HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABADR.A.Sharma, G.P.Mathur, D.K.Seth CHANDRA BHUSHAN MISRA VersusD I O S DAORIA Decided On : 24 February 1995 C. M. W. P. No. 16639 of 1994

HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
R.A.Sharma, G.P.Mathur, D.K.Seth
CHANDRA BHUSHAN MISRA
Versus
D I O S DAORIA
Decided On : 24 February 1995
C. M. W. P. No. 16639 of 1994