Allowed

M.Suresh Babu v. the Deputy Director of Education

Kerala HC5 Feb 2019WP(C)/2777/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, teaching staff under suspension, sought reinstatement. Court found no scope for interference to interfere in absence of further evidence. Petitioner ordered reinstated forthwith subject to enquiry completion within three months with specific conduct conditions.

What did the court decide?

Reinstatement ordered forthwith subject to conditions: completion of enquiry within three months, cooperation, and mandatory undertakings regarding conduct and witness intimidation.

M.Suresh Babu Vs the Deputy Director of Education — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 16TH MAGHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No.2777 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

M.SURESH BABU HEADMASTER (UNDER SUSPENSION), SASTHA AUP SCHOOL, CHAMRAVATTAM, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.R.K.MURALIDHARAN

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-01.

¶11

2 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676101.

¶12

3 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676101.

¶13

4 THE MANAGER, SASTHA AUP SCHOOL, CHAMRAVATTAM, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676102.

¶14

5 A SINDHU, TEACHER, SASTHA AUP SCHOOL, CHAMRAVATTAM, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676102.

¶15

BY ADVS. SRI.C.DINESH SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR

¶16

OTHER PRESENT:

¶17

SMT.NISHA BOSE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.(C) No.2777/2019

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner, Headmaster of Sastha AUP School,

¶23

Chamravattam in Malappuram District, is under suspension from 22.09.2018. His conduct as a Head Teacher is the subject matter of disciplinary enquiry. He appears to have forwarded some WhatsApp messages to the 5^th respondent and other teachers with lewd contents. Ext.P9 is the charge memo. The main allegation against the petitioner is in regard to forwarding of messages . The other allegation is that he misbehaved with the 5^th respondent. The petitioner prays reinstatement.

¶24

Adv.Sri.C.Dinesh appeared for the 4^th respondent Manager and opposed the prayer.

¶25

I do not find any scope for interfering in the matter in the absence of further evidence. Since the petitioner is under suspension for more than three months, it is appropriate he is reinstated forthwith subject to the following conditions:

¶26

The petitioner shall not intimidate any persons including the 5^th respondent for giving evidence against him. The petitioner hereafter shall not forward any messages to the 5^th respondent or any

¶27

W.P.(C) No.2777/2019

¶28

¶29

other lady teachers in the school. The reinstatement of the petitioner will be subject to the outcome of enquiry. The enquiry shall be completed within a period of three months. The petitioner shall co-operate with the enquiry.

¶30

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE

smp

W.P.(C) No.2777/2019

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶38

EXHIBIT P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 24.8.2016.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ALONG WITH THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE HUSBAND OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 11.1.2017.
EXHIBIT P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY RECEIVED FROM THE DISTRICT POLICE, TIRUR DATED NIL.
EXHIBIT P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION IN WRITING SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 28.4.2017.
EXHIBIT P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT ALONG WITH THE COVERING LETTER BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 30.5.2017 OBTAINED UNDER RTI ACT.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 15.11.2018 AND DEPOSITION OF SUMATHI V.U.
EXHIBIT P6(a)	TRUE COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF ABDULLA KOYA.
EXHIBIT P6(b)	TRUE COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF MAYADEVI ANTHARJANAM.
EXHIBIT P7	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT RECEIVED UNDER RTI ACT BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF SUSPENSION DATED 22.9.2018.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES AND STATEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS DATED 11.10.2018.
EXHIBIT P10	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 25.10.2018.
EXHIBIT P11 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL	A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DPI DATED 3.2.2017. True Copy

¶39

P.S to Judge

¶40

smp

M.Suresh Babu v. the Deputy Director of Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Suresh Babu v. the Deputy Director of Education

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

Mary V.J. Vs the State of Kerala

Remya Prabha, Vs the State of Kerala

Syamkumar K Vs the State of Kerala

Lakshminarayanan a Vs State of Kerala

P.K.Sukumara Panicker, Vs State of Kerala

Binu John, Vs the District Executive Officer