Disposed

Jimmy Varghese v. the Manager, St.Josephs High School

Kerala HC2 Dec 2019WP(C)/6563/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging an enquiry report against a teacher. The court did not decide on merits but granted liberty to the petitioner to file a revision against the report before the Government if preferred within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to petitioner to file revision against enquiry report before Government within three weeks.

Jimmy Varghese Vs the Manager, St.Josephs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

WP(C).No.6563 OF 2018(U)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶6

MONDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941

¶7

WP(C).No.6563 OF 2018(U)

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

JIMMY VARGHESE

¶10

S/O.VARGHESE, AGED 36, PHYSICAL EDUCATION TEACHER, ST JOSEPHS' HIGH SCHOOL MATHILAKAM, TRISSUR.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.VINOD VALLIKAPPAN

¶12

RESPONDENT/S:

¶13

1 THE MANAGER, ST.JOSEPHS HIGH SCHOOL MATHILAKAM, TRISSUR DISTRICT-680 685

¶14

2 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER CIVIL STATION, IRINJALAKUDA, TRISSUR- 680 001

¶15

R1 BY ADV. SRI.SERGI JOSEPH THOMAS R1-2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶16

SMT.MARY BEENA JOSEPH,SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

WP(C).No.6563 OF 2018(U)

¶19

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:

¶22

“i) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to the 2^nd respondent calling for the records and the files leading to Ext.P10 Enquiry report and quash the same hold the same to be against the provisions of section 75 of the KER and against the directions and orders of this Court in Ext.P4 judgment.

¶23

ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 2^nd respondent to acknowledge the reinstatement of the petitioner vide Ext.P7 proceedings and to disburse salary to the petitioner.

¶24

Iii) To direct costs of this petition as against the 2^nd respondent.

¶25

iv) To grant such other reliefs as are just and proper on the circumstances of the case.”

¶26

The basic material facts for the disposal of this writ petition are as follows: Petitioner, a Physical Education Teacher working in St.Jospeh's High School, Mathilakam, Thrissur District was suspended, pending enquiry. An enquiry report was

¶27

WP(C).No.6563 OF 2018(U)

¶28

¶29

drawn against the petitioner, which was challenged by the petitioner before this Court in W.P.(C)No.9647/2015, which was disposed of as per Ext.P4 judgment dated 12.2.2016 quashing the report and directing to re-conduct the enquiry in accordance with the provisions of Rule 75 of Chapter XIV A of the KER. Any how, thereafter, an enquiry was conducted and Ext.P10 report is drawn by the District Educational Officer dated 24.5.2016. It is thus challenging Ext.P10 enquiry report, this writ petition is filed.

¶30

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner was reinstated in service on 17.7.2017, and the Manager on the basis of liberty given by the DEO in Ext.P10 has reprimanded the petitioner. The main contention put forth by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that, even though in the earlier round of litigation specific directions were issued to conduct enquiry in terms of law, none of the procedure contemplated under law was followed and therefore, Ext.P10 report suffers from the vice of arbitrariness and illegality susceptible to be interfered with by this Court under Article 226

¶31

WP(C).No.6563 OF 2018(U)

¶32

¶33

of the Constitution of India.

¶34

A detailed counter affidavit is filed by the 2^nd respondent, ie. the District Educational Officer, Irinjalakuda, Thrissur District, justifying the stand adopted in Ext.P10 enquiry report. Learned Government Pleader has also pointed out that against the order of reprimand made by the Manager, the District Educational Officer has placed the matter before the Government for securing necessary approval.

¶35

Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that if an opportunity is provided to the petitioner to prefer a revision against Ext.P10 report, the issue can be considered along with the approval sought for by the DEO against the reprimand order issued by the Manager.

¶36

In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of leaving open the liberty of the petitioner to challenge Ext.P10 report by filing suitable revision before the Government, and if any such revision is preferred within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, it shall be finalised, at the earliest and at any rate, within three months from the date of

¶37

WP(C).No.6563 OF 2018(U)

¶38

¶39

receipt of revision from the petitioner along with the proceedings placed by the DEO in respect of reprimand order issued by the Manager, after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the Manager.

Sd/

SHAJI P.CHALY

JUDGE

Jm/

WP(C).No.6563 OF 2018(U)

¶45

¶46

APPENDIX

¶47

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶48

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 18-7-2011 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT SCHOOL
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF ENQUIRY REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ENQUIRY OFFICER DATED 14-1-2015
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DISMISSING THE PETITIONER FROM SERVICING DATED 28-2-2015
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12-2-2016 IN WP(C)9647 OF 2015
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION BY THE PETITIONER TO THE ENQUIRY SUBMITTED TO THE ENQUIRY OFFICER DATED 19-4-2016
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17-2-2017 IN WP(C)25514 OF 2016
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT REINSTATING THE PETITIONER TO SERVICE DATED 17-7-2017
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE REINSTATEMENT OF THE PETITIONER DATED 9-11-2017
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY TO THE EXHIBIT P7 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT MANAGER DATED 23-11-2017
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT DATED 24-5- 2016
RESPONDENT'S/S EX	HIBITS:
EXHIBIT-R2(A):	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B4-2751/15 DATED 6.2.2018.

Jimmy Varghese v. the Manager, St.Josephs High School

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jimmy Varghese v. the Manager, St.Josephs High School

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

Suresh Kumar T., Vs State of Kerala

Geo Skaria Vs State of Kerala

N.K.Jumaila, Vs the State of Kerala

Dr.Josephmichael Vs State of Kerala

Mini Gangadharan Vs State of Kerala

Build Tech Engineers and Contractor Vs Dr.a.Kowsigan