Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 915 of 2021 Petitioner :- Sweta Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Milan Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Durga Singh,Shashi Kant Verma
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Durga Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.
This petition is directed against the order dated 27.11.2020 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Farrukhabad, according to which petitioner's contractual engagement has not been extended. Consequently, petitioner's engagement on honorarium basis has been discontinued. This order has been assailed on the ground that neither any reason has been recorded in the order nor petitioner has been given an opportunity of hearing.
Considering the nature of order proposed to be passed, learned counsel for the parties agree that the matter may be disposed of at this stage itself without calling for counter affidavit.
Admittedly, petitioner was engaged in the year 2010 and such yearly engagement has been renewed from time to time. The scheme under which petitioner has been engaged provides that initial engagement for one year is liable to be extended, unless the services of teacher are found unsatisfactory. Submission is that petitioner's services have not been found unsatisfactory and therefore denial of extension is arbitrary.
Sri S.K. Verma, learned counsel for the respondent has obtained instructions according to which there were certain complaints with regard to petitioner's working and that she was also found guilty of misleading the officers. It has also been observed in the instructions that the petitioner's working was not satisfactory and she committed misconduct.
Although a regular disciplinary inquiry may not be necessary in case of contractual employee, yet where the disengagement or denial of extension is on the basis of certain complaints or misconduct attributed to the teacher concerned, atleast a minimum opportunity of hearing would be required so that the teacher could respond to the allegations made against her. This procedure admittedly has not been followed in the matter. Neither the petitioner has been made aware of the charges nor she has been given any opportunity of hearing. In such circumstances, order passed by the authority concerned dated 27.11.2020 cannot be sustained.
Considering the nature of petitioner's engagement, it would be appropriate to dispose of this petition with a direction upon the District Basic Education Officer, Farrukhabad to furnish all materials that have been relied upon against her for arriving at a conclusion that the petitioner's conduct is not proper to the petitioner. Such materials will be furnished to petitioner within a period of two weeks from from the date of service of the order. Petitioner would be at liberty to submit her reply in that regard within two weeks, thereafter. The District Level Committee which is entrusted with the task of engagement would consider petitioner's reply and would take a fresh decision in the matter relating to extension of petitioner's engagement in the next academic sessions. The order impugned dated 27.11.2020 shall abide by the fresh order to be passed by the authority concerned.
Writ petition accordingly stands disposed off.
Order Date :- 27.7.2021 n.u.