Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:42994 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1390 of 2025 Petitioner :- Umesh Chandra Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajeet Kumar Shukla,Prabhakar Awasthi Counsel for Respondent :- Akhilesh Kumar Sharma,C.S.C. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. This Court has passed following order on 05.02.2025 :- "1. Prima facie, the impugned order dated 15.01.2025 is grossly illegal for more than one reason. The foremost is that the inspection of the school was conducted at the dictate and command or rather the officious intervention of the District Magistrate, Chandauli through a Deputy Collector in his establishment, who has no business to inspect basic schools established by the Basic Siksha Parishad. The basic schools function under the control of the Basic Siksha Adhikari, who is answerable in line to the Additional Director (Basic), the Director, Basic Education and then the Secretary in the department of Basic Education headed by a Minister. The District Magistrate/Collector, who is essentially a Revenue Officer, has no role to play in supervision of schools, established by the Board of Basic Education. Therefore, prima facie, the direction by the District Magistrate, Chandauli to a Deputy Collector to inspect a school, established by the Board of Basic Education is absolutely without jurisdiction. Equally responsible is the Basic Siksha Adhikar, Chandauli, who succumbed to the said direction of the District Magistrate and did not tell him that he has no jurisdiction in the matter. The order of suspension is based on a joint report of the Deputy Collector and the Block Education Officer, both of whom inspected the school under the directions of the District Magistrate. This seems to bring in the element that the order impugned was passed at the dictate and command of the District Magistrate. 2. Even if that is set apart, the charges that have been mentioned in the impugned order in more than necessary detail at the stage of an order of suspension show poor performance of the petitioner as a Teacher. This may effect her future prospects of promotion or earning increments but certainly does not of itself constitute a charge of misconduct on the basis of which a major penalty, particularly a terminal one, could be imposed. Therefore, the discretion to suspend pending inquiry has been arbitrarily exercised in this matter, prima facie. 3. A prima facie case is made out. 4. Admit. 5. Issue notice. 6. Notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2 is accepted by learned Standing Counsel and that on behalf of respondent nos. 3 and 4 by Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Sharma. Both the learned Counsel are granted two weeks' time to file a counter affidavit. 7. In particular, a personal affidavit shall be filed by the District Magistrate, Chandauli showing cause why he interfered in the functioning and supervision of a basic school established by the Basic Education Board leading to the impugned order dated 15.01.2025. 8. The Basic Siksha Adhikari, Chandauli shall show cause why she permitted the District Magistrate to intermediate in the management and supervision of a basic school under her control in the district. 9. List for orders on 10.04.2025 by which time all affidavits shall be put in and a report regarding status of pleadings made by the Office. Ref:- Civil Misc. Stay Application No. 1 of 2025 10. Issue notice. 11. Until further orders of this Court, operation of the impugned order dated 15.01.2025 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Chandauli shall remain suspended and the petitioner shall be permitted to discharge her duties and paid salary regularly. 12. Let this order be communicated to the District Magistrate, Chandauli and the Basic Siksha Adhikari, Chandauli through the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli by the Registrar (Compliance) within 48 hours. " Learned Standing Counsel for State submits that a charge-sheet is prepared and handed over to petitioner. Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel for petitioner submits that till date delinquent petitioner has not received any charge-sheet. In the aforesaid circumstances, since this Court has already passed aforesaid interim order which is continued till date as well as departmental inquiry has still not initiated, therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with an observation, by making interim order absolute, with a direction that charge-sheet, if still not handed over to petitioner, will be given to him within two weeks and thereafter with co-operation of petitioner the inquiry may be concluded within 8 weeks thereafter, if there is no legal impediment. Order Date :- 24.3.2025 P. Pandey Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad