Rajkhowa, J. — The petitioner has challenged the order of termination of his service by the impugned order dated 3.6.85 passed by respondent 2, the Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, New Delhi. 2. The petitioner was serving as a Drawing Teacher in the Kendriya Vidyalaya at Narengi, Gauhati. By Memo No. F/Conf/ Kun/84-85/83 dated 16. 4. 85, the petitioner was informed by the Principal, Kendriya Vidyalaya, Narengi (respondent 3) that a com­plaint against him was received by him from Mrs. C. P. Ahuja, respondent 4, regarding alleged misbehaviour by the petitioner with her minor daughter Miss Punam Ahuja, a student of Class V (B) on 11.4. 85 during school hours. Thereafter a summary enquiry was held and the allegations were found to be true and, therefore, his services were terminated by the impugned order dated 3rd June, 1985 of respondent 2. 3. Shri Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for the petitioner represented the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan is an authority within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Over the past several years various executive orders, instructions and directions had been issued both by the Ministry of Education and the Sangathan with regard to the functioning of Kendriya Vidyalaya both in the academic and administrative field. The various orders thus issued have been compiled together and named as "Education Code for Kendriya Vidyalaya”. Chapter VIII of the said Code deals with discipline and all employees of the Kendriya Vidyalaya, Regional Offices and Head Quarters of the Sangathan are subject to the disciplinary control of the Sangathan. Under Article 80 of the aforesaid Code it has been decided that the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, for short "CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965", as amended from time to time would apply mutatis mutandis to all members of the staff except where otherwise decided and that the appointing, disciplinary and appellate authority for the various posts will be as in Appendix-XIX. Article 81 (a) deals with termination of service under the terms of appointment and Article 81 (b) provides for termination of services of an employee found guilty of immoral behaviour towards students. Article 81 (a) deals with termination of service under the terms of appointment and Article 81 (b) provides for termination of services of an employee found guilty of immoral behaviour towards students. Under the Article the Commissioner has given wide powers to hold summary enquiry as it deems proper and practicable in the circumstances of the case that any member of the Kendriya Vidyalaya is prima facie guilty of moral turpitude involving sexual offence or exhibition of sexual immoral behaviour towards any student, he can terminate the services of such employee. Thus referring to the provisions of the Rules, the learned counsel argued that the Commissioner had not given any reason as to why it was not practicable to hold an enquiry under the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, as required under sub-clause (b) of Article 81 of the Education Code, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. 4. On the other hand Sri Sk. Chand Mohammad, the learned Sr. Central Government Standing Counsel relied on Article 81 (b) of the Education Code for Kendriya Vidyahya, which reads as under : "Where ever the Commissioner is satisfied after such a summary enquiry as he deems proper and practicable in the circum­stances of the case that any member of the Kendriya Vidyalaya is prima facie guilty of moral turpitude involving sexual offence or exhibition of immoral sexual behaviour towards student, he can terminate the services of that employee by giving him one month's or three month's pay and allowances according as the guilty employee is temporary or permanent in the services of the Sangathan. In such cases procedure prescribed for holding enquiry for imposing major penalty in accordance with CCS ( CCA ) Rules, 1965 as applicable to the employees of the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, shall be dispensed with provided that the Commissioner is of the opinion that if it not expedient to bold regular enquiry on account of serious embarrassment to the student or his guardians or such other practical difficulties. The Commissioner shall record in writing the reasons under which it is not reasonably practicable to hold such enquiry and shall keep the Chairman of the Sangathan informed of the circumstances leading to such termination of services." On the basis of the provisions of the afoesaid Article it was recommended that the services of petitioner may be terminated dispensing with the detail enquiry under Clause 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 so as to save the student and her parents from embarrassment and considering the practical difficulty involved in holding the same. Learned counsel has referred to the observations made by the Commissioner, respondent 2, as to why a regular enquiry could not be held, which we quote below:- "I have carefully gone through the report rendered by Shri S. P. Bauri, Education Officer, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan. Gauhati Region on the alleged gross misconduct and immoral behaviour of Shri M. Choudhury, Drawing Teacher, Kendriya Vidyalaya, Narengi with Kumari Poonam Ahuja, a student of Class V-B of the same school. I am convinced that Shri M. Choudhury did try to criminally assault a minor girl as all the evidence points to this conclusion. I consider that no regular inquiry is necessary because such an action would be extremely painful to the innocent young child who has already undergone a traumatic experience and also to the parents who would naturally like to shun any further adverse publicity of this unfortunate incident. A teacher holds a unique position of trust, respect and responsibility in the society. He is expected to protect and train and develop children placed in his care, mentally, physi­cally and morally. Children have full trust in him and emulate his example both in words and deeds. Shri Choudhury by him indecent, unbecoming and immoral act has not only injured the susceptibility of an young minor girl causing her irreparable psychological damage but also shattered the confidence of students in the teaching community. Shri Choudhury, by his shameful act, has proved that he is not fit to be a teacher. In Kendriya Vidyalayas we have got co-education and the moral standards of the teachers have to be extremely high or the system just cannot function. Such acts as committed by Shri Choudhury need to be dealt with firmly and there is no scope for any leniency. In Kendriya Vidyalayas we have got co-education and the moral standards of the teachers have to be extremely high or the system just cannot function. Such acts as committed by Shri Choudhury need to be dealt with firmly and there is no scope for any leniency. In view of the above, I propose to terminate the services of Choudhury under the provisions of Article 81 (b)of the Education Code for Kendriya Vidyalayas, reproduced in para 5 of the preceding note. Chairman, KVS may kindly see for information before the services of Shri Choudhury are terminated.” 5. The punishment of termination of service of an employee is an extreme penalty inflicted upon a delinquent in case of commission of grave offence and resorted to in rare occasions necessitating such drastic action. In our anxiety to satisfy ourselves as to the necessity of resorting to that drastic step. We have perused the statement of Miss Punam Ahuja and the delinquent (petitioner) in the summary enquiry. We are satisfied that the matter was really serious and if the extreme punishment was not inflicted, it would shake the very fabric of the institution in which Punam was a student and delinquent was a teacher. We are also satisfied as to the reasons given by respondent 2 as to why a regular enquiry could not be held and why action had to be taken in exercise of the powers vested in him under Article 81 (b) of the Education Code. 6. In the result, we do not find anything to interfere with the impugned order and therefore the petition is dismissed. Raghuvir, C. J. — I agree.