Judgment · High Court

: Mr.A.K.Nayak, Advocate.

#3. 17.12.2013 ORDER (Dr. A.K. Rath, J.) Challenge is made to the order dated

19.2.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.23677 of 2012. We have Mr.Nayak, learned counsel for the appellant. Mr.Nayak, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the order dated 19.2.2013 passed in WP(C) No.23677 of 2012 is not sustainable in law. He submits that the minor son of the appellant no.1, namely, Ashish Jayapuria, appellant no.2 prosecuting his studies in Sodhamal Sevashram High School, Sodhmal in the district of Jharsuguda. He was directed to do menial work at the instance of the Headmaster of the School and cleaning the hostel and when appellant no.1 protested the highhanded action -2- of the Headmaster, appellant no.2 was removed from the School. He further submits that in the order dated

19.2.2013, learned Single Judge has observed that the Headmaster himself had gone to the house of the appellant no.1, but appellant no.1 refused to send his minor son to the School, is not correct. He further submits that the statement made by the Headmaster before the learned Single Judge that the name of the boy has not been deleted or cut off, is also not correct. When we asked Mr.Nayak a specific question, as to whether the son of appellant no.1 is attending the school or not, Mr.Nayak submits that at present the son of appellant no.1 is attending the school, but then, no hostel facilities have been provided to him. Having heard Mr.Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, we dispose of this appeal with a direction to the Headmaster, Sodhamal Sevashram High School, Sodhmal, opposite party no.5, to accommodate the appellant no.2 in the hostel. We have passed this order keeping in view the future of a minor student. The Headmaster shall do well to keep appellant no.2 in the hostel, if there is no other impediment. The writ appeal is disposed of. .....……………… ......................... Judge Chief Justice -3-