Court disposed of a writ petition challenging an order refusing re-employment after noticing the interim stay period expired on 31.05.2017. The petition allows rights to be pursued in proper forums.
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 JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.03.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.D. AUDIKESAVALU
W.P. No. 3012 of 2017 and W.M.P. No. 2908 of 2017
K.Mathialagan
...Petitioner
-vs-
The Chief Educational Officer, Namakkal District.
...Respondent
Prayer:- Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the Respondent passed in Mu. Mu. No. 10907/A1/2016 dated 01.02.2017 and to quash the same and consequently direct the Respondent to allow the Petitioner to continue in service on re-employment till the end of academic year up to 31.05.2017 as per the proceedings issued by the Respondent in Mu. Mu. No. 5524/A1/2016 dated 12.07.2016 with all consequential and other attendant benefits.
For Petitioner : Mr. G.Sankaran
For Respondent : Mr. Stalin Abhimanyu, Additional Government Pleader (Education)
O R D E R
Heard Mr. G.Sankaran, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Stalin Abhimanyu, Learned Additional Government Pleader (Education) appearing for the Respondent and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties.
“2. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner would submit that though the Petitioner retired from service, till the completion of the academic year, he is continuing in service as the Headmaster of the Government High School, R.Pudupalayam, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District and with regard to the complaint given by the Parents-Teachers Association, he had initiated action against Tmt.C.Kavitha, a Graduate Teacher and also submitted proof and without properly appreciating the same, the order of re-employment till the completion of the academic year between 01.08.2016 and 31.05.2017, came to be canceled vide the impugned order. The Learned Counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to paragraph No. 16 of the affidavit and would submit that the original impugned order has been received by him only on 04.02.2017 and he has not handed over the charges to the senior most Post Graduate Assistant and further that, no other person is posted as regular Headmaster of the School and prays for interim orders.
Though the Respondent had filed an application in W.M.P. No. 12894 of 2017 on 14.03.2017 to vacate the said interim order, the period for which the Petitioner was permitted to work has already lapsed on 31.05.2017. In such circumstances, though nothing remains for further consideration in respect of the claim made in this Writ Petition, it is made clear that both parties are not precluded from working out their rights relating to any unresolved dispute between them before the proper forum in the manner recognized by law.
In fine, the Writ Petition is disposed with the aforesaid observations. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (CO) //True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
skr
To The Chief Educational Officer, Namakkal District.
+1cc to Government Pleader SR. No.16231
W.P. No. 3012 of 2017
NMI (CO) PR (08/04/2022)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the interim stay granted during pendency of the writ petition is covered by the order, as the stay period expired end of academic year.
Whether the petitioner can continue in service given the expiration of the interim order.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
K.Mathialagan
Chief Educational Officer, Namakkal District
P.D. Audikeshavalu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
