The Allahabad High Court noted that under service rules, the District Basic Education Officer has no jurisdiction to review or cancel any of his orders.
A Single Bench of Justice Manjive Shukla passed this order while hearing a petition filed by Seema.
Petitioner through the petition has challenged the order dated 9.10.2023 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Mathura, whereby the order dated 8.5.2023 by means of which petitioner was reinstated in service with a major penalty of withholding of one increment permanently, has been cancelled.
Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the District Basic Education Officer, Mathura passed an order on 8.5.2023, whereby petitioner was reinstated in service with a punishment of withholding of one increment permanently and further vide order dated 8.5.2023, petitioner was posted as Head Mistress in Purv Madhyamik Vidyalaya Birjapur, Block Mathura, District Mathura.
Thereafter, the aforesaid order dated 8.5.2023 was modified vide order dated 9.5.2023, whereby petitioner’s posting was changed to Primary School Purv Madhyamik Vidyalaya Bandi, Block Baldev, District Mathura.
Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner has further submitted that the District Basic Education Officer, Mathura has passed an order on 9.10.2023, whereby earlier order dated 9.5.2023 by which petitioner was reinstated in service with major penalty of withholding of one increment permanently, has been cancelled.
Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner has argued that once the order of punishment was passed under the provisions of U.P Basic Education Staff Rules, 1973 read with U.P Government Servant (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1999, then the District Basic Education Officer, Mathura does not have any jurisdiction to review/cancel the said order, therefore the order dated 9.10.2023 is absolutely without jurisdiction.
Udit Chandra, counsel appearing for the Respondents No 3 and 4 has submitted that since petitioner’s posting has to be changed from one institution to another, therefore the District Basic Education Officer, Mathura has passed an order on 9.10.2023 and thereby has cancelled his earlier order dated 8.5.2023.
The Court observed that,
I have considered the rival submissions advanced by the counsels appearing for the parties and prima facie, I find that the order dated 8.5.2023 was passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Mathura in exercise of his powers under the provisions of U.P Basic Education Staff Rules, 1973 read with U.P Government Servant (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1999 and under the said rules, there is no provision for review/cancellation of the punishment order.
Accordingly, prima facie, the order dated 9.10.2023 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Mathura, appears to be without jurisdiction.
The Court further observed that the matter requires consideration.
The Court granted three weeks time to file counter affidavit for the respondent no 4 and one week time to file rejoinder affidavit for the petitioner.
“Till the next date of listing, operation and enforcement of the order dated 9.10.2023 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Mathura, shall remain stayed, petitioner shall be allowed to work and shall be paid salary”, the Court ordered.
The Court has fixed the next hearing of the petition on December 07, 2023.