Court No. - 28
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5521 of 2018 Petitioner :- Ghulam Hussain Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Ali Ausaf Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent and Sri Jamil Ahmad Azmi, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.5.
The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 12.01.2018 passed by Committee of Management of Madarsa Darul Uloom Ahle Sunnat Faizun Nabi, Kaptanganj, District Basti / respondent no.4 whereby his services have been terminated.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that his services have been terminated without following the procedure of inquiry prescribed by law and he has been terminated from services after 9 years of working in the institution run by respondent nos.4 and 5.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the order dated 31.3.2014 passed by this Court in Special Appeal no.331 of 2014 - C/M Madarsa Jamia Arabia Malikul Uloom Vs. State of U.P. and four others wherein this Court has held that the Inspector / Registrar, U.P. Madarsa Education Board, Jawahar Bhawan, Lucknow is the Competent Authority to go into the resolution of the Committee of Management regarding the termination of services of any employ of Madarsa and his prior permission is not required under law. He has further relied upon the judgment in the case of Bholanath Mukherjee and others Vs. Ramakrishna Mission Vivkananda Centenary College and others reported in (2011) 5 Supreme Court Cases 464 and in case of Buddhi Nath Chaudhary and others Vs. Abahi Kumar and others reported in (2001) 3 Supreme Court Cases 328, wherein the Apex Court has held that interference with the working of the candidate who have put in substantial amount of service should not be made.
Learned counsel for the respondents has relied upon the judgment in case of Syed Yaqeen Ahmad Vs. Director, Urdu (Pra.Bha.) Uttar Pradesh and others reported in 2006(10) ADJ 267 (DB), which also reinforce the proposition that the Registrar is the Competent Authority to look into the termination order passed against an employee of Madrasa. Learned counsel for the respondent further relied upon the judgment in the case of Jainendra Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in (2012) 8 Supreme Court Cases 748, wherein it has been held that the order of appointment obtained by fraud could be legitimately treated as voidable at the option of the employer and it is discretion of the employer to verify his character and antecedent for continuing him in service.
In view of the fact that the parties agree that the Registrar has power to look into the merits of the termination order and the procedure adopted before passing the order. Therefore, the Registrar / Inspector, U. P. Madarsa Education Board, Jawahar Bhawan, Lucknow will call for entire record of disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and examine it under Rule 34 of the Uttar Pradesh Ashaskiya Arabi Farsi Madarsa Rules and shall take appropriate decision in accordance with the Rule aforesaid within a month from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The respondent no.2, Committee of Management of the Madarsa, shall forward the entire record of proceedings to Registrar / Inspector aforesaid within one week from today. The notice of this order is deemed on the respondent no.5 through its counsel present in Court.
In view of the above, writ petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 22.2.2018 SS