Quashed

Dr. Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Dec 2022WRIA/21630/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed an order dislodging an ADhoc principal by the District Inspector of Schools during a preliminary inquiry initiated by the District Magistrate, holding no power existed to do so in absence of suspension or regular inquiry.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 06.12.2022 passed by respondent no.2/District Inspector of Schools, Ballia to dislodge the petitioner as ADhoc principal is quashed.

Dr. Ashok Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21630 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Dr. Ashok Kumar Pandey Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Kailash Singh Kushwaha,Sanjay Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶6

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is, till date, the petitioner has not been visited with any order of suspension. Also there is no enabling provision in law which may allow the consequences of suspension to be visited on the petitioner during the conduct of the preliminary inquiry. As on date, neither any charge-sheet has been issued to the petitioner nor any regular disciplinary proceeding has been initiated.

¶7

Taking note of such submission, the petitioner had earlier approached this Court in Writ-A No. 17479 of 2022 which has been entertained and the order dated 07.10.2022 passed to dislodge the petitioner from fucntioning as adhoc Principal of the institution Sri Sudhisht Baba Inter College, Sudishtpuri, Raniganj, Ballia, has been stayed.

¶8

In face of the stay order, the impugned communication dated 06.12.2022 issued by the DIOS is not only erroneous but in the teeth of the earlier stay order granted by this Court.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel has opposed the writ petition. He has relied on the fact that serious inquiry is pending against the petitioner, therefore, the charge of Principal cannot be made over to him. At the same time, he could not justify the impugned order in face of the interim order dated 09.11.2022 passed in Writ-A No. 17479 of 2022 .

¶10

The facts are undisputed. As of now no regular domestic inquiry has been initiated against the petitioner. In any case, the petitioner has not been suspended. The inquiry being referred to the impugned communication is in the nature of preliminary inquiry that too initiated by the District Magistrate who is not the disciplinary authority of the petitioner.

¶11

Merely because that inquiry has been permitted to be completed in view of the order dated 02.12.2022 passed by this Court in Dr. Ashok Kumar Pandey vs State of U.P. & 3 Ors. (Writ A No. 19923 of 2022) , it cannot be said, there is any conflict between that order and the earlier order passed by this Court to the petitioner in Dr. Ashok Kumar Pandey vs State of U.P. & 3 Ors. (Writ A No. 17479 of 2022) .

¶12

Other than reference of the disciplinary inquiry, no reason has been assigned in the order dated 06.12.2022.

¶13

In absence of any power to exist as may allow the DIOS to dislodge an adhoc Principal pending a preliminary inquiry, the writ petition must succeed on this short ground. To that extent, the facts being clear, no counter affidavit is required to be filed at this stage. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 06.12.2022 passed by respondent no.2/District Inspector of Schools, Ballia is quashed. However, it shall remain open to the respondents to proceed in accordance with law, if facts so arise, in future.

¶14

Present petition stands allowed .

¶15

Order Date :- 21.12.2022 Prakhar

¶16

Digitally signed by :- PRAKHAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dr. Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harish Chandra Mirg Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ved Ram Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

C/M Haleem Muslim Post Graduate College and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vinod Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

C/M Adarsh Inter College Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mahaveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others