Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.32 seconds)
Documents citing Principal, Rastriya Inter College, ... vs District Inspector Of Schools, ... on 4 February, 2000

Committee Of Management, St. Charles ... vs District Inspector Of Schools And Ors. on 2 November, 2000

This decision was approved by a Division Bench of this Court in Principal, Rastriya Inter College, Bali Nichlaul, District Maharajganj and Ors. v. District Inspector of Schools, Mahrajganj and Ors., (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.
Allahabad High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 4 - V M Sahai - Full Document

Lourdes Convent Girls Higher Secondary ... vs Surat Ram on 19 November, 2004

In Daya Shanker Tiwari v. Principal R.D.B.M. Uchchtar Madhyamik Vldyalaya, Neogaon, Mirzapur and Ors. (1998) 2 UPLBEC 1101, approved in Special Appeal No. 1012 of 1999 in Principal, Rastriya Inter College, Bali Nichlaul, Mahrajganj and Anr. v. District Inspector of Schools, Mahrajganj and Ors., 2000 (1) ESC 704 (All), it has been held by this Court that Sub-section (1) of Section 16G of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 provides that the conditions of service of every person employed in a recognized institution shall be governed by the Regulations made under the Act. The statute provides framing of Regulation providing conditions of service for every person employed including class-IV employees. Regulation 31 of Chapter III of the Regulations so framed under U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 provides for prior approval in case of certain punishments including termination. Regulation 100 does not categorically make Regulation 31 applicable in case of Class IV employees, but it also does not include Regulation 31 from its applicability to Class IV employees, and, thus, Regulation 31 read with Section 16G (1) of the Act makes it clear that in case of termination of the services of a Class IV employee, prior approval of the Inspector is required:
Allahabad High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - S Ambwani - Full Document

Indra Deo Dube Son Of Sri Badri Dube vs The District Inspector Of Schools, The ... on 31 March, 2005

4. On the other hand, the petitioner has submitted that as provided under Regulation 31 of Chapter III of Regulations framed under the Intermediate Education Act, 1921, services of Class-IV employees cannot be dispensed with except with the prior approval of the District Inspector of Schools as in the present case no prior approval of the District Inspector of schools has been taken, therefore, the order of dismissal is liable to be set aside. The petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of 1998 (2) UPLBEC 1101 Dava Shanker Tiwari v. Principal and Ors., 2001 (1) UPLBEC 707, Principal Rashtriya Inter College, Maharajgani v. District Inspector of Schools and 2000 (2) UPLBEC 1216 Sita Ram v. District Inspector of Schools and has submitted that assuming for the purpose of argument that no such prior approval of the District Inspector of Schools is necessary I and only an appeal which can be filed before the District Inspector of Schools against an order of dismissal. Even the entire proceedings is vitiated on the ground of violation of Regulations 35, 36 and 37 of Chapter III of the Regulations framed under the Intermediate Education Act read with Regulation 10 thereof specify the procedure for disciplinary action. It has been submitted that no inquiry whatsoever has been conducted. The petitioner objected against the appointment of Sri. O.P. Saxena on the ground of bias as Sri O.P. Saxena has already filed first information report against the petitioner and the matter was under investigation.
Allahabad High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 1 - S Kumar - Full Document

Bishan Chandra Agrawal And Ors. vs State Of Uttar Pradesh And Ors. on 18 March, 2005

Further reliance has been placed by the petitioner upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Special Appeal No. 1012 of 1999, decided on 4th February, 2000, Principal, Rastriya Inter College v. District Inspector of Schools. The aforesaid case was regarding the termination of a peon, that is, Class IV employee. The Division Bench of this Court has held that the prior approval is necessary before dismissal of a Class IV employee. The petitioner has further submitted that in view of the Uttar Pradesh Recognized Basic Schools (Junior High School) (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers) Rules, 1978, Rule 15 is the similar provision as under U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, Section 16-G (3) (a). Rule 15 and Section 16-G(3) (a) are being reproduced below :--
Allahabad High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 3 - S Kumar - Full Document

Rishikesh Lal Srivastava vs State Of U.P. & Others on 10 December, 2012

In support of the said submission, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on a Judgment of this Court in Daya Shankar Tiwari Vs. Principal R.D.B.M. Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Neogaon, Mirzapur and others, (1998) 2 UPLBEC 1101; Shanker Saran Vs. Vesli Inter College, Azamgarh and others, (1991) 1 UPLBEC 467, and he also placed reliance on Division Bench's judgement in Principal Rashtriya Inter College, Bali Nichlaul, District Maharajganj and another Vs. District Inspector of Schools, Maharajganj and others, (2000) 1 UPLBEC 707.
Allahabad High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 4 - P K Baghel - Full Document

Principal, P.N.V. Inter College And ... vs The Distt. Inspector Of Schools And Ram ... on 25 July, 2006

6. The said judgment was cited with approval by the Division Bench in the case of Principal, Rashtriya Inter College (supra) wherein also it has been held that prior approval of the District Inspector of Schools is necessary before the dismissal of Class-IV employees of an aided college. As such the dismissal of respondent No. 2 from service, without the approval of the District Inspector of Schools, was not justified in law.
Allahabad High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - V Saran - Full Document
1