IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6885 of 2004 MADAN PRASAD SHARMA, SON OF SRI SIDHESHWAR PRASAD SINGH ACTING HEADMASTER, MIDDLE SCHOOL, ANJANI GOVINDPUR, POLICE STATION- DHANARUA, DISTRICT- PATNA. ……….PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2.THE SECRETARY (PRIMARYEDUCATIOIN) , SECONDARY, PRIMARY AND ADULT EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 3.THE DIRECTOR (PRIMARY EDUCATION) SECONDARY, PRIMARY AND ADULT EDUCATION DEPARTMENT NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 4.THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, PATNA. 5.THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, PATNA. 6. MR. ASHOK KUMAR SON OF NAME NOT KNOWN, THE THEN DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, PATNA. 7. AJIT KUMAR SON OF NAME NOT KNOWN, PRESENT DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, PATNA. ………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 04/ 22.11.2010 Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State, this court is thoroughly dissatisfied with the manner in which Mr. Ajit Kumar, District Superintendent of Education, Patna has passed the impugned order of punishment inflicting punishment of warning as also withholding salary of the petitioner for the period of his suspension. It is not in dispute, that the petitioner was 2 subjected to a Disciplinary Proceeding and that after had been acquitted of the charges by the successive Enquiry Officers. It is also not in dispute that the matter was inquired into by as many as three to four authorities but none of them had found the charges to have been proved against the petitioner. Normally, the Authorities having found such inquiry report in favour of petitioner ought to have closed the matter specifically when such charge was not very serious and related to his casual absence on two working days in his school. If however, the respondents despite of all these admitted facts were determined to take action against the petitioner because he was the Incharge Headmaster and his alleged absence along with other teachers leading to complete closure of the school, the authorities were required to at least give the petitioner an opportunity to show cause by way of disclosing reasons for differing with the findings of Enquiry Officer. That was also not done and the order which has been passed only goes to show that the order of punishment had been passed on the direction of the Deputy Development Commissioner, Patna. 3 Counsel for the State, in fact also is not in a position to the aforesaid fatal infirmities save and except raising preliminary objection to the very maintainability of the writ application on the ground that the petitioner despite having a statutory alternative remedy of moving an appeal against such order of punishment and having not done so, this case has to be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. In the facts and circumstances as noted above when the rules of Natural Justice were completely infringed by of the respondents, the petitioner cannot be shown doors by this Court specially when he has been kept waiting for more than six and a half years. Additionally, this court would find that the impugned order of punishment is not only in complete violation of the principles of natural justice but also in teeth of the law laid down by Apex Court in the case of Punjab National Bank vs Kunj Bihari Mishra reported in 1998(7) SCC 84. Considering all these aspects, the writ application is allowed and the impugned order contained in. Annexure-1 is quashed. Before parting with, this Court must record its 4 total dissatisfaction, the manner in which the power of disciplinary control as against the teachers of the Primary School is being exercised by the District Education Establishment Committee. It appears that neither the Chairman Collector of the District, nor the Secretary, District Superintendent of Education, of the aforesaid Committee who are primarily responsible for taking such final decision are not aware of even the basics of holding of a departmental proceeding and dealing with matters relating to disciplinary control. It is high time that the Principal Secretary of Human Resources Development Department, would address himself to such an alarming situation and would issue necessary guidelines for educating the controlling authority under the Rules for exercising their power of disciplinary control in respect of the teachers of the Primary Schools. With the aforementioned observation and direction this writ application is allowed. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)