Opinion
July 7, 1955.
Present — Foster, P.J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Imrie, JJ. [See post, p. 977.]
Proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to review an order and decision of the Commissioner of Education. At the culmination of a long and bitter controversy between the petitioners as members of the board of education of Union Free School District No. 4, town of Babylon, county of Suffolk, and the superintendent of schools of the district, the superintendent was removed from office by a majority of the school board. The superintendent appealed to the State Commissioner of Education and the result of this proceeding was that the superintendent was ordered reinstated. This decision was made April 15, 1954, and on July 2, 1954, the State Commissioner denied the petitioners' application to reopen and directed the order for reinstatement be obeyed. At the next meeting of the board, the faction opposed to the superintendent, constituting a majority of the board, defeated a motion for reinstatement. Only when the commissioner instituted a proceeding directed to the removal of the members of the board was the order of the commissioner obeyed and the superintendent reinstated. This was on July 20th; but the members of the majority faction stated at the meeting they were reinstating the superintendent under compulsion and expected to get rid of him shortly. At the August 13th meeting, rules were adopted as to the powers of the superintendent which emasculated his function. On September 17th, the board again suspended the superintendent. On further appeal to the commissioner, the petitioners, as the majority faction of the board, were thereupon removed from office on due notice. This proceeding reviews that order. The commissioner is expressly vested by statute with such power to remove for willful disobedience of a lawful requirement of the commissioner or want of due diligence in obeying such a requirement. (Education Law, § 1706.) We regard the reasons for suspension of the superintendent by the board after his reinstatement had been ordered as colorable and specious; and designed solely to evade the direction of the commissioner; and even if they may be deemed debatable and open to other interpretations, the decisions of the Commissioner of Education on controverted issues within the State system are entitled to respect. It has not been demonstrated on this record that his decisions here were either arbitrary or unreasonable. Some firm and final authority is needed to bring peace to an unruly controversy affecting the administration of the schools and that authority is vested by law in the State Commissioner of Education. We regard his decisions to be fully warranted on the record before us. Determination unanimously confirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements.