1. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief.

2. Petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 6.1.17 by which Commissioner, Higher Education has allowed the appeal filed by the respondent No.3 and set aside the order of termination dated 3.8.2016.

3. Facts of the case in brief are as under. That the respondent No.3 filed a Writ Petition No.8198/2014 challenging the appointment of Dr. Jacob Thudipara as Principal of Indore School of Social Work. The writ petition came up for hearing on 3.3.2016. By that time Dr. Jacob has crossed the age of superannuation, therefore, direction was given to relieve him immediately and the petitioner was directed to hand over the charge of post of Principal by taking into account various executive instructions issued by the State Government and in accordance with law. The Additional Director, Higher Education vide order dated 4.3.2016 has directed President of the school to hand over the charge of the Principal to respondent No.3 who is the senior- most Professor in the school. It is alleged in the petition that on 5.3.2016 respondent No.3 forcibly entered into the chamber of Principal and misbehaved with the office bearers of the governing body and the in-charge principal and also to the outgoing Principal. It is further alleged that she used un-parliamentary language and got published the entire episode in the media due to which the image of the institution has tarnished, therefore, the management has decided to initiate disciplinary proceedings against her. By order dated 12.3.2016 she was placed under suspension. Petitioner issued various notices dated 5.3.2016, 14.3.2016 and 21.3.2016 for service or order of suspension. By resolution dated 12.3.2016 the board of Governors has decided to constitute an enquiry committee comprising of three members to take disciplinary action against respondent No.3. Charge sheet dated 24.6.2016 was issued to the respondent. Even the charge-sheet sent to the respondent No.3 by post has been returned with the noting of “refused to accept”. Copies of the envelopes with endorsement

are annexed with the writ petition. The petitioner institution also got published notice in the local newspaper with the direction to the respondent to appear before the enquiry committee on 3.8.2016 at 2:30 p.m. The news was published in “Choutha Sansar” daily newspaper dated 30.7.2016.

4. On 3.8.2016 the enquiry committee has submitted its report and found guilty of misconduct against all the charges. The said report was placed before the Board of Governors on the same day i.e. 3.8.2016 at 3:00 p.m. The Board of Governors has decided to terminate the services of the respondent and passed the order on 3.8.2016.

5. Being aggrieved by the termination order petitioner preferred appeal before the Commissioner, Higher Education in which she alleged that the termination order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice. She has also alleged that enquiry officer has not sent any notice and the management has not served copy of the enquiry report and the show cause notice proposing the punishment. By order dated 3.8.2016 the suspension of the respondent No.3 was set aside by the Commissioner, Higher Education and in order to avoid her joining on the same day petitioner has terminated the services of the petitioner by raising the ground of protection under Article 30 of the Constitution of India being a minority institution. The detailed reply was filed by the petitioner before the appellate authority on 26.9.2016.

6. Learned Commissioner has found that the entire action of the petitioner terminating the services of respondent No.3 is in violation of principles of natural justice and there were no sufficient reason in the enquiry report for terminating the services of the petitioner, hence the termination order dated 3.8.2016 was set aside and petitioner has been directed to reinstate respondent No.3 in service, hence the present pet