|
The Gwalior Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court has stayed the suspension of a government primary school teacher who allegedly posted an offending video on social media discussing the LPG shortage.
A single bench of Justice Ashish Shroti further directed the District Education Officer (DEO) to take a decision based on relevant facts, noting that the suspension order was passed in haste and allegedly under the "dictates" of an MLA. The case pertains to a primary teacher posted at Government Primary School in Shivpuri district, who was suspended after allegedly posting a video on his social media on March 12 discussing the shortage of LPG. Following which, he was placed under suspension for posting an "objectionable" video with an intent to cause "disturbance" in society, thereby "damaging" the image of the department. Challenging the order, counsel for the petitioner argued that the video does not contain any objectionable material which could cause disturbance in society, but merely stated about the shortage of LPG due to the Israel-Iran war. Thecounsel further argued that the entire action has been taken at the dictates of an MLA from the constituency. The MLA wrote a letter to DEO, and immediately, the order of suspension was passed. Hearing the matter, the court stated, "...it is seen that on March 12, at about 6 PM, the alleged offending video was uploaded by the petitioner. On March 13, respondent no.4 (MLA from the constituency) wrote a letter to respondent no 3 (DEO) seeking action against the petitioner, alleging that in the video the petitioner had mimicked a popular political leader. On the very same day, the impugned order came to be passed. It is thus evident that respondent no.3 did not consider the justifiability or desirability of placing the petitioner under suspension. Also, the impugned order does not contemplate any inquiry." The court further added that the respondent no 3 failed to consider the instructions issued by the Government vide circular, wherein it is provided that a Government servant should be placed under suspension only when a major penalty is likely to be imposed. "Thus, the impugned order is found to have been passed in haste, allegedly under the dictates of respondent no.4, and in a routine manner. Therefore, respondent no.3 is required to reconsider the matter by applying his mind to the facts and circumstances of the case. Accordingly, instead of keeping the matter pending, it is remitted to respondent no.3 for reconsideration and for passing a fresh order," the court said. "Prima facie, the impugned order dated March 13, is found to have been passed without consideration of relevant circumstances, its operation shall remain stayed, till passing of a fresh order by respondent no 3," the court added. (ANI)
|
