Allowed

Jayanthi Krishnan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Jan 2020WA/43/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala movable the Single Judge's order directing the Board of Directors to consider the appellant's explanation. It directed the Managing Director to abstain from Board meetings regarding the enquiry and ordered an inquiry within two months.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was disposed of with a direction to the Board of Directors to consider the appellant's explanation after hearing, and for the Managing Director to abstain from the Board meeting.

Jayanthi Krishnan Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 24TH POUSHA, 1941 WA.No.43 OF 2020

¶7

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 35372/2019(V) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶8

APPELLANT:

¶9

JAYANTHI KRISHNAN, AGED 43 YEARS, W/O. MANI V.K, AISWARYA, VELIYANOOR, THRISSUR-680563.

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.P.SANJAY SMT.A.PARVATHI MENON SRI.BIJU MEENATTOOR SRI.PAUL VARGHESE (PALLATH) SRI.P.A.MOHAMMED ASLAM SRI.KIRAN NARAYANAN

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES(F), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN CODE-695001.

¶13

2 KERALA SMALL SCALE INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,PIN CODE-695001.

¶14

3 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,KERALA SMALL SCALE INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN CODE-695001.

¶15

4 JAYASHREE C.O(ENQUIRTY OFFICER)JAYASHREE AND ASSOCIATES, NRA-1, NANDAVANAM ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033.

¶16

WA No.43 of 2020

¶17

¶18

5 K. BJAYAKUMAR,MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA SMALL SCALE INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN CODE-695001.

¶19

R1 BY SRI ANTONY MUKKATH SR.GP R2-3 BY ADV. MR.BIJU G., SC, SIDCO

¶20

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WA No.43 of 2020

¶22

¶23

JUDGMENT Dated this the 14^th day of January, 2020

¶24

Vinod Chandran, J.

¶25

The petitioner challenges the enquiry proceedings which reached the stage of show cause notice produced as Ext.P14, after the enquiry report produced at Ext.P13 order was submitted to the Disciplinary Authority. Admittedly the 5^th respondent has issued the show cause notice, who is the Disciplinary Authority of the appellant.

¶26

2. The petitioner alleges that there was a complaint given, against the Managing Director-the 5^th respondent, of sexual harassment and a crime is registered. However, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation would submit that in fact Ext.P5 shows that there is no allegation of sexual harassment. In any event, we are not going into the allegation of harassment raised by the

¶27

WA No.43 of 2020

¶28

¶29

appellant against the 5^th respondent. The enquiry which culminated in Ext.P14 is with respect to other allegations of misconduct committed otherwise in the course of her duty.

¶30

3. The appellant has many contentions against the enquiry conducted itself. However, we are not looking into that since the Disciplinary Authority as of now has not entered into concrete findings on the enquiry report. The only allegation is that there is a charge of sexual harassment by the appellant-the delinquent employee, against the Disciplinary Authority itself. In such

¶31

circumstances we are of the opinion that the learned Single Judge rightly directed the Board of Directors to consider the explanation to the show cause notice as submitted by the petitioner. All contentions against the enquiry proceedings and the allegation of harassment raised are left open to be

¶32

¶33

WA No.43 of 2020

¶34

considered in the appropriate proceedings. We are apprised of the fact that the 5^th respondent also is a member of the Board of Directors being the Managing Director. We are of the opinion that ideally the 5^th respondent should abstain from participating in the meeting of the Board of Directors which considers the explanation offered by the appellant. The learned Standing Counsel also submits that he has already advised the organisation to ensure that the Managing Director is not participated in the meeting. We dispose of the writ appeal with that additional direction.

¶35

4. We make it clear that we have not made any observation as to the allegations made against the Managing Director or the allegations or findings in the subject enquiry. The Board of Directors shall consider the reply to the show-cause notice, after affording an opportunity

¶36

WA No.43 of 2020

¶37

¶38

of hearing to the appellant within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment and expeditious orders shall be passed.

¶39

Writ appeal is disposed of with the above directions. No order as to costs.

¶40

Sd/K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE.

¶41

Sd/V.G. ARUN, JUDGE.

¶42

Jma/

Jayanthi Krishnan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayanthi Krishnan v. State of Kerala

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

Suresh C., Vs the Accountant General (E and Rsa)

Dr.Gracykutty Mathew, Vs State of Kerala

Dineshan E. Vs State of Kerala

P.Udayakumar, Vs State of Kerala

P.K.Harikumar Vs Union of India

Kerala State Electricity Baord Ltd. Vs P.Ambili