Devinder Gupta, J. - (1.)The instant writ petition was preferred on 25.5.1995 in which the petitioner has sought directions for quashing memo annexure PX dated 10.7.1994, placing the petitioner under suspension in contemplation of initiating disciplinary proceedings. The other prayer made is to quash the charges contained in charge sheet annexure P-XII dated 17.7.1994 being void and illegal, in view of Section 8(4) of Delhi School Education Act (for short 'the Act') as well as Rules 115 and 116 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973 (for short 'the Rules') and to grant a declaration that the petitioner is in continuous employment as a teacher in respondent No.4 School.
(2.)Various facts stated in their respective affidavits filed by the parties need not be stated except noticing those as are relevant for the purpose of deciding this petition. At the very outset it may be observed that at this stage, in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India we are not inclined to make any observations or interfere with the charge sheet served upon the petitioner qua which it is stated on behalf of respondent No.4 that on completion of enquiry a decision has been taken to dispense with petitioner's service, subject to the approval being granted by the Director of Education. As and when, in case approval is accorded by the Director of Education, the petitioner can avail his remedy in accordance with law to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings.
(3.)The undisputed facts are that respondent No.4 is an unaided recognised school. On 5.7.1991 the petitioner joined respondent No.4 School as a Mathematics teacher. There have been some complaints against the petitioner regarding his work. On 9.6.1994 a memo was issued to him calling for his explanation. Situation did not remain normal thereafter viz-a-vis the petitioner, who made complaints against the school management and the management also continued seeking his explanation. A complaint also appears to have been lodged by the petitioner with S.H.O., Police Station Vikaspuri on 8.1994. On 10.7.1994 an emergent meeting was called by respondent No.4, in order to consider the action to be taken against the petitioner regarding the alleged wilful neglect of his duties, his alleged behaviour due to which respondent No.4 school was allegedly brought to disrepute and with regard to the loss of his confidential file. Managing Committee recommended to place the petitioner under suspension with a view to maintain discipline in the school. Accordingly in pursuance to the resolution, memorandum annexure PX was issued placing the petitioner undersuspension pending disciplinary proceedings, which were contemplated. The said order said that the petitioner will be entitled to all other facilities which are available to an employee who is put undersuspension.