Nov - High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1054 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2009
was obtained. The petition, therefore,
deserves to be allowed and the impugned
order of termination be quashed on this
ground alone. Since the impugned order is
liable to be quashed on the ground that no
approval of the DIOS was obtained in the
case of the petitioner, prior to terminating
him from service, the other grounds
sought to challenge the propriety of the
impugned order is not considered."
21. It may again be pointed out that
none of the aforesaid decisions took
notice of the decision in the case of
Principal, Shitladin Inter College,
(supra). The same position was reiterated
in the case of Committee of
Management, St. Charles Inter College,
Sardhana (supra) by a learned Single
Judge of this Court, as contained in
paragraph 12, which reads as follows:-
"12. The next question is whether
the management could dismiss a class IV
employee without obtaining prior
approval of the DIOS as provided in
Chapter III, Regulation 31. Counsel for
the petitioners argued that no prior
approval of DIOS was required for
dismissing a class IV employee. On the
other hand Counsel for the respondent
No. 2 urged that prior approval of DIOS
was necessary. In the alternative the
learned Counsel urged that in cases where
prior approval of DIOS has not been
obtained the class IV employee could
prefer appeal before the management and
representation before the DIOS. The
argument is supported by a Single Judge
decision of this Court in Daya Shanker
Tiwari v. Principal, R.D.B.M. Uchchatar
Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Neogaon,
Mirzapur and others, 1998 (1) ESC 403
(All). The learned Single Judge held that
the provisions of Regulation 31 read with
Section 16-G (1) were applicable before
dismissing a class IV employee. And
prior approval of Inspector or Regional
Inspectress was required to be obtained by
the management. This decision was
approved by a Division Bench of this
Court in Principal, Rastriya Inter
College, Bali Nichlaul, District
Maharajganj and others v. District
Inspector of Schools, Maharajganj and
others, (2000) 1 UPLBEC 707. Therefore,
since prior approval of DIOS was not
obtained by the petitioners before
dismissing the respondent No. 2, the
DIOS rightly set aside the dismissal
order."
Another learned Single Judge in the
case of Ram Khelawan Maurya Vs.
District Inspector of Schools (supra)
arrived at the same conclusion by holding
as follows:-
"7. It is settled law that the
punishment can be awarded after prior
approval of the District Inspector of
Schools or the Regional Inspectress of
Girls School. Since approval of the
District Inspector of Schools was not been
obtained, the decision of the Committee
of Management is bad in law.
It is submitted on behalf of
respondents that Regulation 31 of the U.P.
Intermediate Education Regulations while
providing for prior approval in case of
Class IV employees the said paragraph
refers to all employees and there is no
reason to exclude Class IV employees
from the applicability of the said
regulation. Subsequent paragraph of the
Regulation 31 also refers to Class IV
employee.
This Court in the case of Principal,
Rashtriya Inter College (supra) has held
that prior approval in case of dismissal of