Townhall Times | New Delhi —
In an astonishing case from Delhi’s government school system, a principal who was officially dismissed on March 24, 2024, over fake documents continues to draw his full monthly salary and allowances — totaling over ₹2 lakh — without interruption. The case raises serious questions about departmental complicity and administrative lapses.
Mr. S.P. Mishra, who served as principal of a government school in Shalimar Bagh, was found guilty in a departmental inquiry of securing his post through forged educational certificates and documents. Despite the proven charges, Mishra has neither been effectively removed from service nor has his salary been stopped.
Recently, the Delhi government recruited 332 principals through UPSC. It is alleged that documents of around 100–150 candidates among them were forged, yet firm action was missing. Only a few were issued notices; dismissals were extremely rare.
In Mishra’s case, even after proven charges, the department and its legal representatives allegedly weakened the case deliberately in the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT). Consequently, in October 2024, CAT ruled in Mishra’s favor, citing the department’s weak defense. Instead of appealing against the CAT decision in the High Court — as the department does promptly in other teachers’ cases — the department remained silent. This silence effectively kept Mishra’s dismissal on hold while ensuring he continued to receive his salary.
Technically, Mishra’s dismissal order was never formally modified after the CAT ruling, nor was it challenged in higher courts. As per rules, the department should have either withdrawn the dismissal based on CAT’s order or contested it in the High Court. But neither happened, and Mishra continues to receive full salary despite being officially dismissed. His powers as principal of the Shalimar Bagh school were also formally seized, meaning he currently holds no legitimate authority — yet remains in the post.
Even more troubling, Mishra is said to continue occupying an official government residence meant strictly for serving officials — despite being dismissed from service.
During Mishra’s tenure, several financial irregularities were reported. These include large-scale corruption in the procurement of student stationery: against the sanctioned budget of ₹430 per student, only items worth ₹130–150 of inferior quality were distributed. Though the then Director of Education, R.N. Sharma, received complaints and an inquiry confirmed the charges, no real action was taken.
Additionally, around 50–60 tons of scrap, valued at approximately ₹15–20 lakh, was allegedly sold secretly under Mishra’s watch, despite CCTV footage and eyewitness accounts. Still, no punitive action followed.
Teachers at the school describe a toxic atmosphere. According to them, over 32 of the school’s 45 regular teachers have applied for transfers due to harassment by Mishra. Guest teachers, lacking transfer options, are reportedly forced to stay under difficult circumstances.
A deeper investigation reveals systemic rot. Sources say a network of senior officials shields tainted individuals like Mishra, ensuring they remain unpunished and free to misuse public funds.
When contacted, the Deputy Director of Education declined to comment, stating, “We do not share details of such cases.” This response only deepens suspicion of an orchestrated cover-up.
Ultimately, the biggest question remains: How can a person dismissed from service continue to work, draw a hefty government salary, and occupy a government residence? And who are the unseen officials enabling this breach of law and public trust?
Leave a Reply