Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:140450 Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7694 of 2007 Petitioner :- Tejbali Sharma Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Director Of Education And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dr. Madhu Tandon,G.N. Verma,Manoj Kumar Srivastava,Mohit Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anuj Kumar,N.L.Srivastava Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J. 1. The present writ petition is filed questioning the impugned orders dated 22.02.1999 passed by the third-respondent and also order dated 21.04.1999 for approval of termination of the services of the petitioner. 2. The main contention of the petitioner is that as the petitioner was appointed as a Class-IV employee in the Institution and has completed 25 years of service and has no blemished record, no charges or any allegations against the petitioner, but for a minor incident the respondents have initiated the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and without affording opportunity of hearing, the Principal has terminated the services of the petitioner vide order dated 22.02.1999. The said order was approved by the respondent no.3 vide order dated 21.04.1999. 3. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner has filed Writ Petition No.19078 of 1999. The said writ petition was dismissed, directing the respondents to complete the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner in accordance with law, expeditiously. The District Inspector of Schools has again passed the order dated 17.10.2000 approving the termination of the services of the petitioner. 4. Aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioner has filed an appeal before the Deputy Director of Education on the grounds of principles of natural justice. The said appeal was entertained and the matter was remanded back to the respondents, but instead of re-considering the entire issue the respondents have once again re- affirmed the order passed on 17.10.2000 vide impugned order dated 02.09.2004. 5. In fact the Committee of Management has also brought to the notice of the third-respondent the lapses committed by the fourth- respondent in terminating the services of the petitioner but the said aspects were not considered by the third-respondent while passing the impugned orders. 6. In reply to the same the respondent have filed counter affidavit and they have specifically contended that initially the petitioner was suspended vide order dated 22.02.1999 and Principal of the Institution after conducting inquiry initiated the departmental proceedings against the petitioner as the petitioner has not supported and cooperated with the departmental inquiry, the respondent-Principal has passed order terminating the services of the petitioner. After filing the appeal by the petitioner the matter has been remanded and the third-respondent has once again considered the entire issue by issuing notice to both the fourth- respondent as well as the petitioner and in response the petitioner has appeared before the authority and heard and after perusing the entire record the present impugned orders have been passed, hence, the third-respondent has complied with the orders passed by the second-respondent by following principles of natural justice, hence the orders are confirmed with the procedure. 7. 7. Considering the submissions made by both the counsel as the impugned order was passed on 17.10.2000 and from the said date onwards the petitioner is out of service and apart from that on merits, it is not in dispute that the third-respondent has provided opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and based on the record the third-respondent confirmed the order dated 21.04.1999 by order dated 17.10.2000. 8. In the said circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the said impugned orders, but on the request made by learned counsel for the petitioner as the Committee of Management has physically made a letter to the third-respondent with regard to lapses committed by fourth-respondent, the petitioner is permitted to file an appeal along with all the relevant records before the second-respondent within a period of one month. If such an appeal is being filed the second-respondent may take appropriate decision after issuing notice to respondent no.4 as well as Committee of Management and the petitioner. The same may be decided within a period of three months, thereafter. 8. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 18.8.2025 AdityaG (Donadi Ramesh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ADITYA GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad