Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 38327 of 2010 Petitioner :- Dhruv Prakash Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- Rajesh Pratap Singh Respondent Counsel :- C. S. C.,Sri Ashok Singh Hon'ble Arun Tandon, J.
Heard Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri R.P.Singh, for the
petitioner and Sri P.K.Saxena, senior Advocate for the respondents.
Counsel for the parties submits that the writ petition may be disposed of at this
stage without calling for any further affidavit specifically in view of the order proposed to
be passed today.
The controversy with regard to the suspension of the present petitioner and
its approval by the District Inspector of Schools came up for consideration before this
Court in Writ Petition No. 12741 of 2010. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties
namely the petitioner and the Committee of Management this Court on 15.3.2010
disposed of the writ petition by providing as follows :-
” For adjudicating upon the issue of approval of suspension, this Court finds
that the grievance of the respondent no. 3 also needs to be examined. Therefore, it
is provided that the District Inspector of Schools shall take fresh decision on the
papers transmitted by the Committee of Management qua suspension of
respondent no. 3 preferably within three weeks from today. He shall afford
opportunity of hearing to the respondent no. 3 as well as the petitioner and shall
pass a reasoned speaking order. ”
The District Inspector of Schools in compliance to the order passed by this
Court has adjudicated upon the dispute by mean of the order dated 2.6.2010 and
has approved the suspension as recommended. It would be relevant to reproduce
the Sameecha and the decision of the District Inspector of Schools :-
leh{kk
lquokbZ es izcU/kd ,oa Jh /kzqo izdk’k flag ds dFku rFkk i=koyh es
izkIr i=ktkrksa ds ifj’khyu ls Li”V gS fd Jh /kqo izdk’k flag izoDrk dks ftu
vkjksiksa esa izcU/k lfefr dz”kd bUVj dkyst] Fkkuk xn`nh tkSuiqj esa vius izLrko
fnukad 14-2-2010+ }kjk fuyfEcr dj fn;k gS A ftl ij tkap dh dk;Zokgh
xfreku gS A vLrq tkaWp lfefr ds vfUre fu.kZ; gksus rd Jh /kzqo izdk’k flag izoDrk
dks izcU/k lfefr }kjk fd;s fuyEcu izLrko fnukad 14&2&2010 dks Lohdkj fd;k
tkuk mfpr izrhr gksrk gS A
fu.kZ;
ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; }kjk dk;kZy; ds i= fnukad 25&2&2010 dks
fujLr dj nsus ds dkj.k rFkk Jh /kzqo izdk’k flag ds fuyEcu ds lEcU/k es tkWp a
dh dk;Zokgh xfreku gksus ds dkj.k fo|ky; izcU/k lfefr }kjk Jh /kzqo izdk’k flag
izoDrk dks fuyEcu ds lEcU/k es fd;k x;k izLrko fnukad 14&2&2010 dks
vuqeksfnr fd;k tkrk gS A rnuqlkj izdj.k fuLrkfjr fd;k tkrk gS A
From the reading of the aforesaid order it would be apparently clear that the
District Inspector of Schools has completely ignored the direction of this Court as
2
per the judgment dated 15.3.2010 which required him to pass a reasoned speaking
order .
In the opinion of the Court reasons have to be recorded with reference to
the material objection raised with reference to the relevant issues. In the facts of
this case the objection raised by the petitioner with reference to his suspension
being malafide has not been examined or dealt with by approving the
suspension.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mool Raj Moorti Vs.
Raghunath Ji Maharaj, reported in AIR 1967 SC 1386 has held that if an order is
passed contrary to the direction of the writ Court then such order would be a nullity.
This Court, therefore, held that the order passed by the District Inspector of
Schools dated 2.6.2010 being contrary to the direction issued by this Court for
want of reasons having been recorded with reference to the objection raised
cannot be legally sustained.
Accordingly this writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The orders dated
2.6.2010 and 18.2.2010 are hereby quashed. Let the District Inspector of Schools
reconsider the matter after hearing the parties, in the light of the observations
made above and those contained in the judgment dated 15.3.2010 preferably
within 4 weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before him.
Writ petition stands allowed.
Dt. 7.7.2010
Sh 38327/10