Rep. by its Secretary, Mr. M. Chandrasekhar Reddy & Ors. v. ESWARAIAH

Heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties. The petitioner has been discharging the functions of the Correspondent of M.K.R. High School, Indukurpet Mandal, Nellore District, pursuant to the Proceedings No.3240/B6/96, dated 04-07-1996 of the District Educational Officer, Nellore. Pursuant to the orders of the G.O.Ms.No.8, dated 30-01-2003 permitting the Managements of private aided educational institutions in the State to fill up the vacant aided posts of teaching and non-teaching staff, the Management of M.K.R. High School has applied for permission to fill up certain existing vacancies. Pursuant to the said application, the second respondent has accorded permission vide proceedings in RC No.5386/B6/2002, dated 02-06-2003 to fill up certain teaching and non-teaching vacancies. By proceedings dated 23-06-2003, the second respondent has also nominated the Deputy Educational Officer as his nominee as member of Staff Selection Committee.

It is stated that one Mr. Chandra Sekhar Reddy, the Secretary of the third respondent herein, who claims to have been elected as Correspondent and who has nothing to do with the affairs of the said school, was interfering with the Management of the school and he has filed O.P.No.454 of 2003 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Nellore, against the petitioner herein challenging the continuance of the petitioner herein as Correspondent of the said school. The II Additional District Judge, Nellore, issued an interim injunction on 03-07-2003 directing the petitioner not to make any appointments in the said school until further orders. Pursuant to the said injunction order in the said O.P., the third respondent made a representation before the second respondent stating that the II Additional District Judge, Nellore, by order dated 03-07-2003 in I.A.No.683 of 2003 in O.P.No.454 of 2003 restrained the petitioner herein functioning as correspondent of M.K.R. High School, and also restrained him from participating in the selection process to be undertaken by the Staff Selection Committee in connection with filling-up of teaching and non-teaching staff.

Pursuant to the said injunction orders in the O.P. and also basing on the application of the third respondent, the second respondent passed the impugned order dated 05-07-2003, requesting the Staff Selection Committee of M.K.R. High School, not to declare the results of the candidates after completion of the selection process scheduled to be held on 06-07-2003 and to keep the results and other related material under the safe custody of Sri M.A.Salam, Deputy Educational Officer, Gudur, who is a nominee of the second respondent, until further orders. Further, the second respondent passed orders dated 15-10-2003 making alternate arrangements by appointing Deputy Educational Officer, Nellore, as a Special Officer to M.K.R. High School, Indukurpet, for drawal and disbursement of salaries of the staff of the said School, subject to the approval of the Commissioner and the Director of School Education, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad.

The petitioner, challenging these two orders, stated that the said injunction order was vacated by the learned II Additional District Judge, Nellore, by order dated 31-12-2003 in I.A.No.683 of 2003 in O.P.No.454 of 2003. Questioning the said order, the third respondent herein filed C.M.A.No.303 of 2004 and this Court by order dated 10-02-2004, dismissed the C.M.A. directing the Court below to dispose of the main O.P. as expeditiously as possible. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the whole basis for passing the impugned orders dated 05-07-2003 and 15-10-2003 is only due to the injunction orders passed the II Additional District Judge, Nellore, dated 03-07-2003 made in I.A.No.683 of 2003 and the said injunction orders have been vacated by the subsequent orders dated 31-12- 2003 and as the said vacation orders have become final by dismissal of the C.M.A. No.303 of 2004 pending disposal of the O.P., the said impugned orders are unsustainable and are liable to be set aside.

The learned counsel for the respondents 3 and 4 submit that there are independent allegations pending against the petitioner and an enquiry has been ordered against him and therefore, he cannot be allowed for functioning as a Correspondent in the said school. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, and for the aforesaid reasons, I am of the opinion that the enquiry pending against the petitioner pursuant to the allegations made against him, are nothing to do with the passing of the impugned orders and the impugned orders are made only based on the injunction order of the Court below, which was vacated and therefore, as there is no injunction restraining the petitioner herein from functioning as a Correspondent of the said school, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside. If there are allegations against the petitioner, it is always open for the competent authority to take action against him in accordance with the provisions of Section 24 of the A.P. Education Act.

Two CD copies.