Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kamal Kishore Sharma vs The State Of M.P. on 30 June, 2015
1
W.P.No.3896/2009
(Kamal Kishore Sharma & ors Vs. State of MP and others)
30062015
Shri Ashok Kumar Jain, Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri S.K.Jain, Government Advocate for the
respondents/State.
By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking the relief that the impugned order dated 31.07.2009/ 01.08.2009, Annexure P/1 passed by the respondent No.3 ordering for deduction of half of the salary for the month of July, 2009 and an endorsement of stigmatic remark made in their service books pursuant to the impugned order be quashed. It is submitted that the alleged inspection done by the District Education Officer, Datia (respondent No.3) was not in accordance with law and in fact there was no inspection. Petitioners have duly attended the classes and it is incorrect to say that petitioners were not at the work place. Therefore, they are entitled for full salary for the month of July, 2009 and the endorsement made in their service books be set aside.
This Court vide interim order dated 31/08/2009 has protected the petitioners.
During the course of hearing, learned State's 2 W.P.No.3896/2009 (Kamal Kishore Sharma & ors Vs. State of MP and others) Counsel as a matter of fact submits that the averments made in the petition and the nature of order passed by the respondent No.3 ex facie has factual dispute as regards the factum of inspection, that led to passing of the impugned order. Adjudication of such factual disputes are not warranted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, it is submitted that the petitioners may be directed to file a representation before the Collector, Datia and in the event it is found by the Collector that the inspection report based whereupon the impugned order passed had factual discrepancy, the said authority may be directed to pass suitable order, in accordance with law.
Learned counsel for the petitioners concedes with the aforesaid suggestion.
In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in the event the petitioners files a detailed representation alongwith a certified copy of the order passed by this Court within 15 days' from today, the respondent No.1/Collector, Datia shall be well advised to look into the petitioners' grievance with due advertence to the record and pass a speaking order after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners if so sought, in 3 W.P.No.3896/2009 (Kamal Kishore Sharma & ors Vs. State of MP and others) accordance with law and communicate the decision to the petitioners within a period of three months thereof. Till then, the interim order passed by this Court shall remain in force.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.
Petition stands disposed of.
(Rohit Arya) Judge b/