The Court held that recovering a teacher's salary for alleged bogus admissions without prior disciplinary proceedings or a finding of personal liability is unjustified and impermissible.
Release salary due, refrain from recovery without proceedings, and refund recovered amounts within two months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 23RD ASWINA, 1941
WP(C).No.3988 OF 2013(W)
PETITIONER:
RAJALEKSHMI M. AGED 40 YEARS
U.P.S.A, P.S.V.P.M.H.S.S., AYRAVON, KONNI-689 691 PATHANAMTHITTA DIST.
BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
2 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.
P.S. VELU PILLAI MEMORIAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL
R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER
R1, R6 BY ADV. SRI.K.E.HAMZA R1 BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.V.VIJAYARAJAN
GP SHRI. RON BASTIAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.3988 OF 2013
2
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers.
“i) To declare that the recovery ordered from the petitioner on the basis of reference No.2 in Ext.P1 is unjust, illegal arbitrary and unsustainable;
ii) To declare that the petitioner is not liable to refund any amount from the salary drawn by her from 05.06.2006 to 31.03.2007 on the basis of any report submitted by the super check cell; iii) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to refrain from recovering any amount from the petitioner on the basis of Reference No.2 in Ext.P1 or on the basis of the stand similar to the one taken in Ext.P1.”
learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel appearing for the 6th respondent.
WP(C).No.3988 OF 2013
3
submitted that after regular appointment from 01.06.2010 an amount of Rs.2,000/- was recovered from the petitioner’s salary for the month of November 2012 and December 2012. It is submitted that the recovery was on the ground that there was reduction of posts by revision of staff fixation after visit the Super Check Cell in respect of the academic year 2006-07. It is stated that the payment of salary to the petitioner in the leave vacancy from 05.06.2006 to 31.03.2007 was therefore irregular and is liable to recovered from the petitioner.
WP(C).No.3988 OF 2013
4
circular No.34025/J2/12/G.EDN dated 21.06.2012 was also considered in detail and it was held that even in the absence of the challenge to the circular, there can be no direction to recover amounts from teachers appointed in posts which were later abolished consequent to visits by Super Checks Cell, except on a finding that, they are in some way responsible for the loss occasioned. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in similar cases the recovery from the headmistress who is responsible for the maintenance of records of the School had also been interdicted and it had been stated that unless disciplinary proceedings are initiated the recovery, would not be sustainable. In the instant case it is submitted that, the petitioner was never put on notice with regard to any recovery and that in the absence of disciplinary proceedings and a finding to the effect that the petitioner is in some way liable, there can be no recovery from her salary, even relying on the 2007 circular.
WP(C).No.3988 OF 2013
5
the headmistress, being the person in charge of the records of the school would be liable.
She had actually worked in the post. Her appointment was approved and salary disbursed to her. It is also not in dispute that there have been no proceedings against the petitioner with notice to her, much less any disciplinary proceedings for imposition of any penalty. There is consequentially no finding as to any responsibility on the part of the petitioner in the bogus admissions during the year 2006-07. As a matter of fact, the respondents in their counter affidavit admitted that the petitioner is not responsible for the bogus admissions.
WP(C).No.3988 OF 2013
6
petitioner, even relying on the circular dated 21.06.2012 would be impermissible. The recovery ordered against the petitioner without the conduct of any disciplinary proceedings or any finding being rendered as to any responsibility on her part for the bogus admissions is completely unjustified.
In the result, there will be a direction to the respondents to release the salary due to the petitioner and not to effect any recovery from the petitioner without appropriate proceedings being taken against her. The question with regard to the claim of the 6th respondent is left open to be decided in appropriate proceedings. The amount recovered shall be refunded to the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
This writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
ANU SIVARAMAN
JUDGE
mpm
WP(C).No.3988 OF 2013
7
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.08.2012. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.06.2009 IN W.A.NO.1288/2007.
// TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE
3 issues framed by the court
Whether an employer can recover salary from a teacher for alleged bogus admissions without prior disciplinary proceedings or a finding of personal liability.
Whether salary recovered on the basis of a post abolition report under the circular dated 21.06.2012 is sustainable in the absence of such proceedings.
Whether a writ should be issued directing the respondents to refrain from further recovery or to refund the amounts already deducted.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vasudevan Namboothiri v. State of KeralaReferred¶29
Vasudevan Namboothiri v. State of Kerala [1997 (2) KLT 529 : ILR 1998 (1) Ker.422] · Who else cites this
W.A.No.1288 of 2007Referred¶29
W.A.No.2552 of 2015Applied¶35
RAJALEKSHMI M.
STATE OF KERALA
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS JAGATHY
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION PATHANAMTHITTA
DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER PATHANAMTHITTA
P.S. VELU PILLAI MEMORIAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL
ANU SIVARAMAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
ANU SIVARAMAN
Parties & counsel
