ORDER 1. Heard. 2. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed seeking indulgence of this Court in the matter of posting of respondent No.6 in Government Higher Secondary School, Badoni. It is submitted that petitioner is working as Principal of aforesaid school. On 25.9.2009 while the petitioner was working as Principal of said school, respondents No.6 who was an Assistant Teacher had hurled abuses on the petitioner and also physically assaulted him. That led to filing of a complaint as regards insubordination and indiscipline against respondent No.6 addressed to the Collector and CEO, Janpad Panchayat. CEO, Janpad Panchayat upon due application of mind had suspended respondent No.6 and attached him to Janpad Panchayat, Datia. However, at a later point of time on his representation, respondent No.6 was reinstated by the Collector and was posted at Government Higher Secondary School, Uprai. During all this period, the enquiry against the respondent No.6 has been in progress and is still pending. However, with the intervention of Minister concerned, respondent No.6 has managed his posting back to Government Higher Secondary School, Badoni though Annexure P/4 dated 4.8.2011 shows that action of posting the respondent No.6 was initiated on the basis of noting of Minister concerned but in note 3 it is also appended that enquiry against the respondent No.6 is still pending. Further petitioner has been directed to join on the post without any order passed in his favour transferring him to Government Higher Secondary School, Badoni. It is submitted that aforesaid events demonstrate the fact that respondent No.6 has been successful in managing back his posting so that he may influence the pending enquiry against him. Under such circumstances, as a matter of fact, when an enquiry has been initiated against respondent No.6 on the complaint of petitioner of the nature of criminal offence vide complaint dated 25.9.2009, the posting of respondent No.6 on direction of Minister at Government Higher Secondary School, Badoni may influence the enquiry, therefore, in such circumstances, it is prayed that order Annexure P/4 be quashed. 3.
3. Per contra, State counsel submits that pursuant to passing of order Annexure P/4, petitioner made a representation (Annexure P/5) dated 5.8.2011 and the Court may direct the District Education Officer and also to the Collector to look into the petitioner's representation and decide the same in accordance with law in backdrop of facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court appreciates the gesture shown by the Government counsel having acceded to the prayer of the petitioner for decision on his representation by DEO and also by Collector. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with following directions:- “(i) the petitioner shall approach the Collector and District Education Officer along with representation (Annexure P/5) and other relevant documents questioning the posting of respondent No. 6 at Government Higher Secondary School, Badoni on the strength of order dated 4.8.2011 within 10 days from today; (ii) The Collector and DEO on their turn shall bestow conscious consideration over the petitioner's representation and documents filed therewith and decide the same dispassionately in accordance with law by a speaking order without being influenced by the noting of the Minister as find place in the order dated 4.8.2011 and shall act independently and impartially; (iii) the aforesaid exercise be completed within a period of three weeks from the date of presentation of representation alongwith certified copy of this order.” 5. With the aforesaid observation, petition stands disposed of. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. R.B.S. Tomar for petitioner; B. K. Sharma Government Advocate for respondents No.1 to 5/State.