The contractual nature of employment and the duty of the institution to promote literacy and education among girl children were central to the judgment.

Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J.

1. The petitioner was employed as an Accountant on contract basis in Kasturba Gandhi Awasiya Vidyalaya, Asoha, District Unnao (for short, the "Institution"). He has preferred this writ petition for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 08.04.2015 passed by the second respondent terminating his services on the ground of misconduct.

2. A brief reference to the factual aspects would suffice. The petitioner was engaged on a fixed salary in the year 2011 for 11 months as an Accountant. His engagement was subject to further extension. A teacher of the Institution Manju Yadav made a complaint on 24.01.2015 against the Warden of the Institution. The District Basic Education Officer on the said complaint constituted a Three-Member Committee, which made a spot inspection of the Institution and has recorded the statement of the teachers and employees. The said report is on the record as Annexure-CA-1 to the counter affidavit.

3. A perusal of the said report reveals a shocking state of affair in Kasturba Gandhi Residential School. It appears that most of the teachers and staff are indulged in serious misconduct. On the basis of the said report the BSA has terminated the services of the petitioner.

4. A counter has been filed by the District Basic Education Officer. The stand taken in the counter affidavit is that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Accountant and his services were purely contractual in nature and was paid consolidated salary for his services.

5. It is stated that several complaints were received against the petitioner regarding his misconduct and indiscipline. A three-member committee was constituted to conduct an enquiry by way of an inspection. The Committee has submitted its report on 19.03.2015.

6. It is stated that the petitioner's statement was not found satisfactory and hence the impugned order dated 08.04.2015 has been passed. Before issuing the said order, the approval of the District Magistrate, Unnao was obtained and after his approval the impugned order dated 08.04.2015 has been passed.

7. It is also stated in the counter affidavit that similar controversy has been decided by this Court in a writ petition i.e. Service Single No. 945 of 2012 (Rekha Devi v. District Magistrate, Unnao and others). This Court by its judgment dated 17.02.2012 has dismissed the writ petition treating the services of warden working at Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya to be contractual. In the said order, there is reference of some other judgments of this Court in similar line.

8. It is also stated that the petitioner was found guilty of not making entry in the visitor register and used to argue on the said issue with the staff members and the charge levelled against the petitioner was found to be correct. It is also stated that the petitioner was also given opportunity to defend himself and the enquiry committee has recorded his statement at the time of the said enquiry.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri S.P. Shukla has submitted that in the complaint which is on the record as annexure-3 to the writ petition, there was no allegation against the petitioner. The enquiry which was conducted was in respect of the complaint and since there was no mention about the petitioner in the complaint hence the services of the petitioner have been illegally terminated. He has also submitted that due to malafide reason the BSA, to save his own persons, has passed the order terminating the services of the petitioner. No other submission has been made.

10. Learned counsel for the District Basic Education Officer Ms. Jyoti Sikka has submitted that the appointment of the petitioner is on contract basis and he was given opportunity by the Enquiry Committee before which he has admitted his guilt.

11. Learned Standing Counsel has taken the Court to the enquiry report and the various paragraphs of the counter affidavit.

12. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel