The Allahabad High Court has said that the District Magistrate/ Collector, who is essentially a Revenue Officer, doesn’t have jurisdiction to inspect a school, established by the Board of Basic Education.
A Single Bench of Justice J.J. Munir passed this order while hearing a petition filed by Santosh Kumari.
The Court noted that,
Prima facie, the order dated 25.10.2024 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, Sambhal through a Deputy Collector in his establishment, who has no business to inspect basic schools established by the Basic Shiksha Parishad.
The basic schools function under the control of the Basic Shiksha 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, Sambhal to a Deputy Collector to inspect a school, established by the Board of Basic Education is absolutely without jurisdiction. Equally responsible is the Basic Shiksha Adhikar, Sambhal, 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.
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 affect 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.
A prima facie case is made out, the Court observed.
The Court granted two weeks’ time to file a counter affidavit for the respondents.
“In particular, a personal affidavit shall be filed by the District Magistrate, Sambhal showing cause why he interfered in the functioning and supervision of a basic school established by the Basic Education Board leading to the order dated 25.10.2024.
The Basic Siksha Adhikari, Sambhal shall show cause why she permitted the District Magistrate to intermeddle in the management and supervision of a basic school under her control in the district.
Until further orders of the Court, operation of the impugned order dated 25.10.2024 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Sambhal shall remain suspended and the petitioner shall be permitted to discharge her duties and paid salary regularly,” the order reads.
The Court has fixed the next hearing of the petition on 07.01.2025.
The post appeared first on .
A Single Bench of Justice J.J. Munir passed this order while hearing a petition filed by Santosh Kumari.
The Court noted that,
Prima facie, the order dated 25.10.2024 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, Sambhal through a Deputy Collector in his establishment, who has no business to inspect basic schools established by the Basic Shiksha Parishad.
The basic schools function under the control of the Basic Shiksha 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, Sambhal to a Deputy Collector to inspect a school, established by the Board of Basic Education is absolutely without jurisdiction. Equally responsible is the Basic Shiksha Adhikar, Sambhal, 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.
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 affect 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.
A prima facie case is made out, the Court observed.
The Court granted two weeks’ time to file a counter affidavit for the respondents.
“In particular, a personal affidavit shall be filed by the District Magistrate, Sambhal showing cause why he interfered in the functioning and supervision of a basic school established by the Basic Education Board leading to the order dated 25.10.2024.
The Basic Siksha Adhikari, Sambhal shall show cause why she permitted the District Magistrate to intermeddle in the management and supervision of a basic school under her control in the district.
Until further orders of the Court, operation of the impugned order dated 25.10.2024 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Sambhal shall remain suspended and the petitioner shall be permitted to discharge her duties and paid salary regularly,” the order reads.
The Court has fixed the next hearing of the petition on 07.01.2025.
The post appeared first on .