Heard Sri R.S. Pandey, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Virendra Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for opposite parties no. 1 and 2.
In view of the proposed order notice to opposite party no. 3 is dispensed with as no prejudice is being caused to the opposite party no. 3 by this order.
By means of this petition the petitioner has prayed following relief :
"(i) To issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus or likewise commanding the respondent no. 1 to take necessary and appropriate decision on the proposal submitted to him by the committee of management of Hewett Polytechnic along with letter dated 05.07.2019 forthwith as provided under regulation 33(22) of 1996 Regulations."
The proposal in question dated 5.7.2019 has been enclosed as Annexure no. 7 to the writ petition.
Learned counsel has further drawn attention of this Court towards section 22-G of U.P. Technical Education Act, 1962 which is being reproduced herein below:
"22G. Dismissal or removal, etc. of teachers.- (1) No Principal or teacher may be discharged or removed or dismissed from service or reduced in rank or subjected to any dimination in emoluments, or served with notice of termination of service except with the prior approval in writing of the Director, whose decision shall be communicated within such period as may be provided by regulations.
(2) The Director may approve or disapprove or reduce or enhance the punishment or approve or disapprove of the notice for termination of service proposed by the Management;
Provided that in the case of a punishment, before passing orders, the Director shall give an opportunity to the principal or teacher to show cause within a fortnight of the receipt of the notice why the proposed punishment should not be approved.
(3) Nothing in this Section shall apply to an order of suspension during the pendency or in contemplation of an inquiry.
As per section 22-G(2) the Director, should approve or disapprove etc. all the action of section 22-G of the Act of 1962.
In view of powers under section 23 of the Act of 1962 the regulation in the name of The Uttar Pradesh Pravidhik Shiksha Institution Receiving grant-in-aid from the Government Regulations have been framed. Regulation 33 provides the modalities regarding inquiry, punishment and suspension and Regulation 33(22) provides as under :
"33(22) The Director shall communicate his decision under section 22-g of the Adhiniyam to the committee of management within six weeks of the receipt of its proposal under sub-regulation (12)."
Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the complete requisition has been sent to the Director vide letter dated 5.7.2019 (Annexure no. 7) but more than six weeks period as mandated under Regulation 33(22) of 1962 Act have lapsed but no decision has been taken, therefore, the innocuous request of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Director may be directed to take appropriate decision on the proposal dated 5.7.2019 (Annexure no. 7) with expedition.
Considering the aforesaid innocuous request of learned counsel for the petitioner, I hereby dispose of the petition at the admission stage directing the Director, Technical Education, U.P., Kanpur to consider and decide the proposal dated 5.7.2019 (Annexure no. 7) strictly in accordance with law by speaking and reasoned order by affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and opposite party no. 3 within a period of four weeks and decision thereof sha