Hon’ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J.—Heard Sri Yogesh Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Siddharth Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 and learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

2. This writ petition has been filed praying for a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 15.7.1993 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Ballia.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that specific averments made in paragraphs-21, 25 and 27 have been replied by the respondent No. 3 in paragraphs-16, 18 and 20 of the counter-affidavit without annexing any evidence of affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thus, averments made in the counter-affidavit are not entertainable in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Singh: Dallu: Nathu Ram: Ram Phal v. State of Haryana, AIR 1988 SC 2181 (para-13) to the effect that when a point which is ostensibly a point of law is required to be substantiated by facts, the party raising the point, if he is the petitioner, must plead and prove such facts by evidence which must appear from the writ petition and if he is t