Disposed

Dr.R.Janardhanan v. the Board of Trustees, Dr.Padiyar Memorial Homeopathic Medical College

Kerala HC19 Feb 2016CRP(UTY)/68/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a revision petition challenging a provisional disciplinary order. Informing both parties of a subsequent final dismissal order, the Court granted liberty to challenge that final order instead, leaving all contentions open.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to challenge the final order of dismissal passed on 3.2.2016.

Dr.R.Janardhanan Vs the Board of Trustees, Dr.Padiyar… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/30TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

CRP(UTY).No. 68 of 2016

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN APPEAL 1/2016 of KERALA UNIVERSITY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DATED 19-01-2016

¶7

REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT:

¶8

DR.JANARDHANAN AGED 54 YEARS S/O.RAMACHANDRA SHENOY, PRINCIPAL DR.PADIYAR MEMORILA HOMEOPATHIC COLLEGE RESIDING AT PANACKAMPARAMBIL, CHANDIROOR PO ALLEPPY DISTRICT, PIN-688 547.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN SRI.K.C.ELDHO SRI.JIJO THOMAS SRI.ANEESH JAMES

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶11

THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, DR.PADIYAR MEMORIAL HOMEOPATHIC COLLEGE DOOR NO.58/6168, FIRST FLOOR, T.D.SHOPPING COMPLEX T.D.WEST ROAD, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682 035.

¶12

THE VICE CHANCELLOR, KERALA UNIVESITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES MEDICAL COLLEGE PO, THRISSUR-680 596.

¶13

THE KERALA UNIVERSITY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 035 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶14

R. BY ADV. SMT.R..RANJINI (CAVEATOR) R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.SREEKUMAR, SC, KERALA UTY. HEALTH & AMP

¶15

THIS CRP (UNIVERSITY ACT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

CRP(UTY).No. 68 of 2016

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

ANNEXURES:

¶19

ANNEXURE A1: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF SUSPENSION DATED 12.4.2013. ANNEXURE A2: A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES DATED 24.10.2013.

¶20

ANNEXURE A3: A TRUE COPY OF EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO ANNEXURE A2 MEMO OF CHARGES.

¶21

ANNEXURE A4: A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.3.2015 IN W.P.(C) NO.26296/13 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶22

ANNEXURE A5: A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 10.12.2015 IN W.A.754/15 AND 784/15 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.

¶23

ANNEXURE A6: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 25.11.2013 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT.

¶24

ANNEXURE A7: TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ENQUIRY OFFICER.

¶25

ANNEXURE A8: A TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO ANNEXURE A7 ENQUIRY REPORT.

¶26

ANNEXURE A9: A TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 14.12.2015.

¶27

ANNEUXRE A10: A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.12.2015 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN W.P.(C)NO.39086/15.

¶28

ANNEXURE A11: TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 26.12.2015.

¶29

ANNEXURE A12: TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO ANNEXURE A11 SHOW CAUSE.

¶30

ANNEXURE A13: A TRUE COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL ORDER DATED 31.12.2015.

¶31

ANNEXURE A14: A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM IN APPEAL NO.1 OF 2016 ON THE FILE OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT.

¶32

ANNEXURE A15: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.1.2016 OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT IN APPEAL NO.1 OF 2016.

¶33

// TRUE COPY //

¶34

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶35

ANTONY DOMINIC & A.HARIPRASAD, JJ.

¶36

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

¶37

C.R.P.(UTY) No.68 of 2016

¶38

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19^th day of February, 2016

¶39

ORDER

¶40

Antony Dominic, J.

¶41

This CRP is filed by the appellant in Appeal No.1/16 on the file of the Kerala University Appellate Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram. The said appeal was filed challenging Annexure A13, a provisional order passed by the first respondent accepting the enquiry report submitted in a disciplinary action initiated against the petitioner and also proposing punishment against him. The said appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal mainly in view of the time frame fixed by this Court in the judgment in W.A.784/15 for finalisation of the proceedings. It is aggrieved by this order of the Tribunal, the appeal is filed.

¶42

We heard the counsel for the petitioner, Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent and also the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.

¶43

It is now informed by both sides that by order dated 3.2.2016, final order has been passed by the disciplinary authority imposing punishment of dismissal. Therefore, at this stage, it is only necessary to

¶44

C.R.P.(UTY) No.68 of 2016

¶45

: 2 :

¶46

give liberty to the appellant to challenge the final order passed in the disciplinary action.

¶47

Having regard to this, this petition is disposed of clarifying that it will be open to the petitioner to challenge the final order, dated 3.2.2016 imposing punishment on him. It is also clarified that none of the findings contained in the order impugned herein shall be of any prejudice to the appellant in his challenge against final order, dated 3.2.2016 and that all contentions are left open.

¶48

Clarifying the position, this petition is disposed of.

¶49

SD/-

¶50

ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE

SD/-

A.HARIPRASAD

JUDGE

jes

Dr.R.Janardhanan v. the Board of Trustees, Dr.Padiyar Memorial Homeopathic Medical College

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.R.Janardhanan v. the Board of Trustees, Dr.Padiyar Memorial Homeopathic Medical College

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

The Dhanalaxmi Bank Ltd. Vs P.Shaym

Fr. Geevarghese Vallikattil Vs St.George Jacobite Syrian Orthodox

Mary Kutty Vs Sadasivan

Social Welfare Centre Kuri Unit Vs Balan

Liza Jo Vs the Registrar

T.R. Ratnam Vs State of Kerala