Disposed

The Manager S.N.Trust v. Dr.Unnikrishnan & Others

Kerala HC15 Dec 2008WP(C)/18865/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court directed the Appellate Tribunal to decide an appeal regarding a Principal's reversion within four weeks of producing the judgment. The Court emphasized hearing both sides afresh and did not pronounce on the merits of the impugned orders.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Tribunal to dispose of the appeal within four weeks and conduct a fresh hearing on the I.A.

The Manager S.N.Trust Vs Dr.Unnikrishnan & Others — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

MONDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2008 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1930

¶5

WP(C).No. 18865 of 2008(U) --------------------------

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

¶8

THE MANAGER, S.N.TRUST, S.N.TRUST BUILDING, KOLLAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.A.N.RAJAN BABU SRI.P.GOPALAKRISHNAN (MVA) SRI.A.R.EASWAR LAL

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

¶12

DR.N.UNNIKRISHNAN, PRINCIPAL (ON PROBATION), (NOW UNDER ORDER OF REVERSION) S.N.COLLEGE, CHENGANNUR.

¶13

THE KERALA UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶14

THE KERALA UNIVERSITY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, KERALA UTY. FOR R2-R3 SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN FOR R1 SRI.T.K.ANANDA PADMANABHAN FOR R1

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WPC NO.18865/2008

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶20

P1 : COPY OF SHAW CAUSE NOTICE.

¶21

P2 : COPY OF REQUEST TO PERMIT HIM TO RETIRE FROM SERVICE.

¶22

P3 : COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY the PETITIONER DATED 30/05/2008.

¶23

P4 : COPY OF LETTER NO.4A/466 DATED 06/02/2008 GRANTED TIME FOR SUBMITTING EXPLANATION.

¶24

P5 : COPY OF EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶25

P6 : COPY OF 1ST RESPONDENT PROBATION IS DISCHARGED AND REVERTED TO THE POST OF SELECTION GRADE LECTURER.

¶26

P7 : COPY OF LETTER POSTED THE PRINCIPAL S.N.COLLEGE CHENGANNOOR DR.SUSHAMA DEVI READER IN POLITICS WAS GIVEN ADDITIONAL CHARGE OF PRINCIPAL.

¶27

P8 : COPY OF ORDER DATED 13/06/2008 IN I.A.NO.10/2008 IN APPEAL NO.5 OF 2008 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶28

P9 : COPY OF APPEAL NO.5 OF 2008 DATED 18/06/2008.

¶29

P10 : COPY OF I.A.NO.10/08 DATED 12/06/2008 FROM PETITIONRES OFFICE.

¶30

P11 : COPY OF NOTICE DATED 16/06/2008 DIRECTING THE PETITIONER TO APPEAR BEFORE TRIBUNAL ON 11/07/2008.

¶31

P12 : COPY OF COMPLAINT RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 28/03/2008.

¶32

P13 : COPY OF EXPLANATION ON 18/04/2008.

¶33

P14 : COPY OF ENQUIRY COMMISSION REPORT AGAINST 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 30/04/2008.

¶34

P15 : COPY F INVESTIGATION REPORT DATED ON 30/04/2008.

¶35

P16 : COPY OF ORDER DATED 19/06/2008 IN I.A.NO.12/2008 IN APPEAL NO.5/2008.

¶36

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS

¶37

R1(a) : COPY OF NEWS ITEM PUBLISHED IN MATHRUBHUMI DAILY COCHIN EDITION.

¶38

R1(b) : COPY OF THE FIR REGISTERED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENGANNOOR.

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE.

ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

W.P.(C) No.18865 of 2008

¶44

Dated this the 15^th day of December, 2008

¶45

The whole controversy in this writ petition arise out of Exts.P8 and P16 orders passed by the 3^rd respondent Tribunal.

¶46

Ext.P8 order was passed by the Tribunal in Ext.P10 I.A filed by the 1^st respondent along with Ext.P9 appeal, which was filed against Ext.P6 order of the Manager reverting him from the post of Principal to the post of Selection Grade Lecturer. Subsequent to Ext.P8, while the appeal itself was posted to 11/07/2008, I.A.No.12/2008 was filed by the 1^st respondent appellant before the Tribunal and Ext.P16 order was passed, directing that the petitioner shall give effect Ext.P8 interim order staying Ext.P6. That order was passed without notice to the petitioner.

¶47

Although several contentions are raised by both sides, it is now agreed by the petitioner and the 1^st respondent that they have already filed their pleadings and that Ext.P9 appeal is ripe for hearing. Taking into account, the above submission made by both sides, I feel it is appropriate that the Tribunal itself should decide the matter finally with notice to both sides on an expeditious basis.

¶48

It is directed that on production of a copy of this judgment, the

¶49

W.P.(C) No. 18865/2008

¶50

-2-

¶51

Tribunal shall immediately post the appeal and dispose of the matter within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. If for any reason, it is not possible, I direct that the Tribunal shall hear both sides afresh and pass orders on Ext.P10 I.A. filed by the petitioner within the time as aforesaid.

¶52

It is made clear that this Court has not pronounced on the correctness or otherwise of the contentions raised by both sides, or on the correctness or otherwise of the orders that are impugned in this writ petition.

¶53

It will be open to the petitioner or the 1^st respondent to produce

¶54

a copy of this judgment before the Tribunal for compliance.

¶55

In the meantime, it is directed that the interim order of stay of

¶56

Ext.P16 passed by this Court on 23/06/2008 will remain in force.

¶57

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶58

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)

¶59

The Manager S.N.Trust v. Dr.Unnikrishnan & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Manager S.N.Trust v. Dr.Unnikrishnan & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Girish M.P. & Another Vs the Deputy Director of Edn., Calicut

A.K.Ebrahimkutty Vs State of Kerala

Beena A.K. & Others Vs State of Kerala and Others

Kerala Public Service Commission Vs G.N.Namboothiri

Savitha P. Vs State of Kerala

M.Abdul Rasheed Vs Director of Collegiate Education