1. Inter alia it has been contended that the respondent no.1 has taken a decision to remove the petitioner after enquiry and appoint Officiating Principal while ordering removal of the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel contends that the order of removal has not been approved by the Registrar, Arbi, Farsi Madarsa Parishad, Jawahar Bhawan, Lucknow, respondent no.4.
3. Action of the respondent No.1, under the circumstances, is in conflict with the provisions contained in Rule 34 of Rules appended with the petition as Annexure 6 at Page 25-26 and also in conflict with the Government Order explaining the Rule (Page 28). Even the Officiating Principle could not have been appointed without approval of respondent no.4. The issue is still pending approval before respondent no.4 at this point in time.
4. Issue notice, returnable on 01.8.2012.
5. At this stage Sri Afzal Siddique, Advocate, has put in appearance for respondent no.4 and Sri Prem Shanker Trivedi, Advocate has put in appearance for respondent nos.1 and 2. They state that the matter is pending adjudication before the authority and no final decision has been taken.
6. Let Counter affidavit be filed by 01.8.2012.
7. In the meantime, any action taken by the respondents would remain subject to final decision of this petition.
Order Date :- 17.7.2012 A.Nigam