Disposed

Preejith M.P. v. the Corporate Manager

Kerala HC25 Jul 2016WP(C)/10717/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the college management to complete disciplinary proceedings by 14.8.2016. Failure to do so would automatically set aside the suspension order and reinstate the petitioner in service with full benefits.

What did the court decide?

Disciplinary proceedings to be completed by 14.8.2016; if delayed, suspension stands set aside and petitioner reinstated as of 16.8.2016.

Preejith M.P. Vs the Corporate Manager — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2016/3RD SRAVANA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 10717 of 2016 (L)

¶6

PETITIONER(S) :

¶7

PREEJITH M.P.,

¶8

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR & HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, S.N.COLLEGE, ALATHUR, ERATTAKULAM (P.O.), PALAKKAD-678 682.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. SRI.T.G.SUNIL (PRANAVAM) SRI.K.R.GANESH

¶10

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶11

1. THE CORPORATE MANAGER, S.N.COLLEGE, THE SREE NARAYANA TRUSTS, POST BOX NO.63, KOLLAM-691 001.

¶12

2. SMT.SOPHIA D.G., HEAD OF DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS, S.N.COLLEGE, ALATHUR, ERATTAKULAM (P.O.), PALAKKAD-678 682.

¶13

R1 BY ADV. SRI.A.N.RAJAN BABU

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25-07-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Msd.

¶16

WP(C).No. 10717 of 2016 (L)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶19

EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 09.03.2016 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 09.03.2016 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTE DATED 10.03.2016 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE PRINCIPAL. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14.03.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE ENQUIRY COMMISSION. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.03.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN 2015(4) KLJ 196. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE SCHEDULE RELATING TO THE ASAP DOWNLOADED FROM MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM OF THE ASAP OF SN COLLEGE, ALATHUR.

¶20

EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE STUDENTS' ATTENDANCE SCHEDULE.

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS & ANNEXURES :

¶22

ANNEXURE A:	A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGE NO.4A3081/2016 DATED 19.03.2016.
EXHIBIT R1(A):	A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 04.03.2016 SUBMITTED BY MISS. NAINA.
EXHIBIT R1(B):	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER FORWARDING THE COMPLAINT BY OF A.S.PRIYANKA.
EXHIBIT R1(C):	A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY MISS. VAISHNAVI DATED 10.03.2016.
EXHIBIT R1(D):	A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 09.03.2016 OF SHINOY A.K CHAIRMAN OF THE COLLEGE UNION DEMANDING AN ENQUIRY.
EXHIBIT R1(E):	A TRUE COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT DATED 10.03.2016.
EXHIBIT R1(F):	A TRUE COPY THE LETTER NO.2016/DATED 11.03.2016 FORWARDED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE PRINCIPAL.

¶23

WP(C).No. 10717 of 2016 (L)

¶24

EXHIBIT R1(G): A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGE NO.4A3081/2016 DATED 19.03.2016. EXHIBIT R1(H): A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.4(A)/5/2016 DATED 31.05.2016 PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT R1(I): A TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL MEMO OF CHARGE AND PROCEEDING NO.4A/285/2016 DATED 13.07.2016 SEND TO PETITIONER. EXHIBIT R1(J): A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.A4/3120 DATED 10.03.2016 SEND TO VICE-CHANCELLOR. //TRUE COPY//

P.S.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

==================

W.P.(C).No. 10717 of 2016

¶30

==================

¶31

Dated this the 25^th day of July, 2016

¶32

O R D E R

¶33

The main prayers in this Writ Petition are as follows:

¶34

“(i) To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to Ext.P-5 and quash the same;

¶35

(ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1^st respondent to allow the petitioner to continue in service.”

¶36

After hearing the parties at length, both parties have

¶37

now agreed that the Writ Petition itself may be disposed of by this Court by directing that the disciplinary proceedings pursuant to the impugned Ext.P-5 suspension order dated 14.3.2016 be completed on or before 14.8.2016 and that, in the event of the disciplinary proceedings not being completed within such time limit, then the impugned order of suspension will stand automatically set aside and the petitioner will stand reinstated in service, without prejudice to the right of the 1st respondent college management to continue

¶38

and conclude those disciplinary proceedings, strictly in accordance with law. In the light of this meeting of minds between the parties,

¶39

W.P.(C).10717/16 - : 2 :-

¶40

it is ordered in the interest of justice that the 1^st respondent corporate manager will ensure that the disciplinary inquiry proceedings pursuant to the impugned Ext.P-5 suspension order dated 14.3.2016 is finalised on or before 14.8.2106 and in the event of the 1^st respondent not completing the disciplinary proceedings on or before 14.8.2016, then the impugned Ext.P-5 suspension order dated 14.3.2016 will stand automatically set aside without any further orders from this Court and in that event, the petitioner will stand reinstated in service and the petitioner will stand automatically re-admtited to service w.e.f. the forenoon of 16.8.2016 and in such eventuality, this will be with liberty to the 1^st respondent to continue and conclude those disciplinary proceedings strictly in accordance with law.

¶41

With these observations and directions, the Writ Petition (Civil) stands finally disposed of.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

sdk+ ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE ///True Copy///

¶44

P.S. to Judge

¶45

W.P.(C).10717/16 - : 3 :-

Preejith M.P. v. the Corporate Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Preejith M.P. v. the Corporate Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Santhoshkumar Vs Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd.

Muhammed Ashique C.S Vs State of Kerala

Sajan V.S Vs Fact

C.K.Purushothaman Vs State of Kerala

G.Mohandas Vs Kerala State Warehousing Corporation

Simi Rahim P.A. Vs Kerala State Electiricty Board