IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1156 of 2001 Sandeep Kumar …Petitioner. Versus District Inspector of Schools, Haridwar and others. …Respondents. Mr. Paresh Tripathi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. Mr. Anil K. Joshi, Advocate for respondent no. 4. Mr. Jagdish Bisht, Advocate for respondent no. 5. 18th June, 2010 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. Heard Mr. Paresh Tripathi, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand and Mr. Anil K. Joshi, Advocate for respondent no. 4 and Mr. Jagdish Bisht, Advocate for respondent no. 5. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the validity, legality and propriety of order dated 17.4.2000 issued by the Chairman, U.P. Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes, Commission, Lucknow, order dated 22-4-2000 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Haridwar (Annexure-8 to the writ petition) as well as the order dated 23-4-2000 passed by the Manager of Committee of Management of “Chaudhary Bharat Singh D.A.V. Inter College”, Jhabeda, District Hardiwar (Annexure-9 to the writ petition). 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: There is a grant-in-aid college functioning at Jhabeda, District Haridwar (now in the State of Uttarakhand), namely, “Chaudhary Bharat Singh D.A.V. Inter College”. The said college issued an advertisement way back in 1998 inviting applications for appointment to the post of Assistant Clerk. Advertisement clearly 2 states that in the appointment preference would be given to scheduled caste candidate and in case scheduled caste candidate is not available, the preference would be given to Other Backward Class candidate. The petitioner who was a member of the OBC community was one of the candidates, who had applied against the said advertisement. Consequently, the petitioner was selected by the Selection Committee and his name was recommended to the District Inspector of Schools, Haridwar for appointment. Consequently, this selection was also given approval by the District Inspector of Schools and the petitioner was formally appointed on the post of Assistant Clerk in the School, on which he joined way back in 1998. Thereafter on 25.11.1998, an application was moved by respondent no. 5 i.e. Padam Singh for appointment to the post of Assistant Clerk. Respondent no. 5 admittedly belongs to a scheduled caste community. Since an OBC candidate had already been appointed, nothing was done on his application. He, then, moved a complaint before the U.P. Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribes Commission, Lucknow, which, in turn, directed the District Inspector of Schools, Haridwar to enquire into the matter. The District Inspector of Schools thereafter held a detail enquiry and concluded that in future when the post of Assistant Clerk becomes vacant, the same shall be filled from the scheduled castes candidates. Unsatisfied with the outcome of this enquiry, respondent no. 5 again approached the U.P. Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Commission, Lucknow. The U.P. Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Commission in turn directed the District Inspector of Schools of the concerned district to take action into the matter and consequently the District Inspector of Schools vide his 3 letter dated 22.4.2000 directed the Manager of the Committee of Management to terminate the services of the petitioner as the post had to be filled up by a scheduled caste candidate and since it has not been done, the Commission has expressed strict displeasure on the state of affairs. The District Inspector of Schools directed the Manager of the Committee of Management to terminate the services of the petitioner. The Manager of the Committee of Management in turn terminated the services of the petitioner vide order dated 23-4-2000. This writ petition has been filed against aforesaid three orders mentioned above. 4. Nothing except the letters of District Inspector of Schools, Haridwar and Management Committee, which are already on record of this case have been relied on by the State. The short case of the State is that the post was to be filled up by a scheduled caste candidate, therefore, it was not proper for the Management Committee to fill this post by an OBC candidate. The same objections are reiterated by respondent no. 5. However, the admitted position in this case is that the advertisement clearly states that the appointment has to be made amongst the scheduled caste candidates and in the non-availability of the scheduled caste candidate, the preference would be given to OBC candidate. It is not a case against the petitioner that he had procured the appointment by way of any fraud or forgery. He clearly stated his class as a candidate belonging to OBC. Although this Court is not going into the aspect as to the powers of the U.P. Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Commission, whether it was authorised to pass an order directing the District Inspector or Schools as it has been done, as this Court is not going on this aspect. The fact of the matter 4 is that before passing the order of termination from service, the District Inspector of Schools and the Manager of the Committee of Management were bound by law presently applicable and must have given a show cause notice and an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before terminating his services. All this has been denied to the petitioner. This is against good conscience and public policy. The impugned orders dated 22.4.2000 and 23.4.2000, therefore, being violative of principle of natural justice and fair play are hereby set aside. 5. The writ petition stands allowed. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 18.6.2010 Rathour