Allowed

Dr. Aby Paul v. the Corporate Manager

Kerala HC23 Nov 2021WA/1504/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the writ appeal, modifying the single judge order to direct immediate reinstatement of the suspended principal. The Court held that keeping the suspension order in abeyance prevented the automatic reinstatement mandated by Kerala Education Rules Rule 67(8) upon rejection of continued suspension.

What did the court decide?

Writ appeal allowed; direction to keep impugned order in abeyance modified; appellant reinstated in service forthwith.

Dr. Aby Paul Vs the Corporate Manager — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 23^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA, 1943

¶7

WA NO. 1504 OF 2021

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 24318/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM

¶9

APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.4:

¶10

DR. ABY PAUL, PRINCIPAL, CHALDEAN SYRIAN HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, HIGH ROAD, THRISSUR - 680001, RESIDING AT MANNUTHY HOUSE, VRINDAVANAM LANE, KURIACHIRA, THRISSUR – 680006.

¶11

BY ADVS. K.T.THOMAS(K/000120/1996) MATHEW BOB KURIAN

¶12

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3:

¶13

1 THE CORPORATE MANAGER CHALDEAN SYRIAN CHURCH SCHOOLS, HIGH ROAD, THRISSUR - 680001.

¶14

2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.

¶15

3 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION (HIGHER SECONDARY WING), HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695014.

¶16

4 THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,SRV GHSS BUILDING,

¶17

WA No.1504 of 2021

¶18

¶19

KASTHURIRANGAN HALL, ERNAKULAM - 682028.

¶20

BY ADVS. K.JAJU BABU (SR.) M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI BRIJESH MOHAN T.S.ATHIRA ANTONY THOMAS ALISHA CHALAKAL

¶21

BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. A.J VARGHESE

¶22

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

WA No.1504 of 2021

¶24

¶25

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., JJ

¶26

WA No.1504 of 2021

¶27

Dated, this the 23^rd day of November, 2021

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar, J

¶30

The 4^th respondent in WP(C)No. 24318 of 2021 is the appellant before us, aggrieved by the judgment dated 05.11.2021 of the learned Single Judge. Shorn of unnecessary details, the brief facts necessary for the disposal of the writ appeal are as follows:-

¶31

Aggrieved by an order of the 3^rd respondent, denying permission to keep the 4^th respondent - Principal under continued suspension beyond the initial period of 15 days as envisaged under the Kerala Education Rules, the corporate manager of the Chaldean Syrian Church Schools, Thrissur, preferred the writ petition impugning the said order of the 3^rd respondent. The learned Single Judge disposed the writ petition, taking note of the pendency of a revision petition preferred by the manager against the very same order before the Government, by directing the Government to consider and pass orders on the revision petition within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The learned Single Judge, however, also directed that till such time as the revision petition is disposed by the Government the impugned order of the 3^rd respondent would be kept

WA No.1504 of 2021

in abeyance.

Before us, it is the submission of Sri. K.T.Thomas, the learned counsel for the appellant that the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge, to the extent it keeps in abeyance the order impugned in the writ petition, pending disposal of the Revision petition by the Government is contrary to the express provisions of the statutory rules.

¶36

We have heard Sri.K.T.Thomas, the learned counsel for the appellant and, the learned senior counsel Sri.Jaju Babu assisted by Smt.M.U.Vijayalakshmi on behalf of the respondent - corporate manager.

¶37

On a consideration of the rival submissions we find that in view of the clear provisions of Rule 67(8) of Chapter XIV-A KER, the automatic consequence of rejection of a request by the corporate manager for keeping a delinquent teacher in suspension beyond the initial period of 15 days contemplated under the Rules, is the reinstatement of the teacher in service. While disposing the writ petition, by directing the Government to consider and pass orders in the Revision petition, therefore, the learned Single Judge ought not to have directed that the order impugned in the writ petition be kept in abeyance since that would tantamount to depriving the delinquent teacher of the statutory benefit of reinstatement pending disposal of the revision petition. We, therefore, allow the writ appeal by modifying the last direction therein, which states that pending disposal of the revision petition, Ext.P7 will stand deferred. As a consequence, the appellant herein shall be reinstated in service forthwith and the question as to whether the

¶38

WA No.1504 of 2021

¶39

¶40

appellant requires to be suspended, pending culmination of the disciplinary proceedings will depend on the outcome of the revision petition pending before the Government.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P, JUDGE

dlk/23/11/

WA No.1504 of 2021

APPENDIX OF WA 1504/2021

¶49

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE

¶50

Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 17.03.2020 ISSUED BY DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THRISSUR. Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF EXPLANATION DATED 08.10.2020 SUBMITTED BY APPELLANT TO 4TH RESPONDENT.

Dr. Aby Paul v. the Corporate Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Aby Paul 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

Sajeev Joseph Vs the State of Kerala

Dental Students Association Vs the Dental Council of India

Aparna P., Vs Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee

Alif Anjumon Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Shylaja K. Unnithan

Sree Vidyadhiraja Homeopathic Medical College Vs Dr. Tara.L