IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2009 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1931 OP.No. 1730 of 2001(E) ------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- C.K.JESSY, HEADMISTRESS, ST.GEORGE'S HIGH SCHOOL, THOZHIYOOR 680 520. BY ADV. SMT.K.K.GEETHA SMT.GIJI MATHEW SRI.A.K.CHINNAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR 680 003. 3. DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD. 4. CORPORATE MANAGER, ST.GEORGE'S HIGH SCHOOL, THOZHIYOOR 680 520. BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.MUHAMOOD T.T FOR R1 TO R3 BY ADVS.MR.V.A.MUHAMMED FOR R4 MR.K.E.HAMZA FOR R4 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CMP. NO.2930/2001 IN OP. NO.1730/2001 DISMISSED 26/05/2009 SD/- T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE PETITION DT. 20.7.00 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT. P2:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP. 28999/2000 DT. 16.10.2000. P3:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 23.12.2000 ISSUED BY DEPUTY DIRECTOR. P4:- COPY OF THE SUBMISSION DT. 1.1.01 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION THRISSUR. P5:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B5/30225/2000 DT. 2.1.01 OF DEPUTY DIRECTOR EDUCATION , THRISSUR. P6:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP. 3220/87 DT. 24.7.87. P6(a):- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 12.12.97 PASSED BY THE DEO. P7:- COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 25.4.98 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE CORPORATE MANAGER. P8:- COPY OF THE REPORT DT. 30.1.99 FILED BY PETITIONER TO THE DEO. P9:- COPY OF THE 16 DOCUMENTS AND LIST OF 5 DEEFENCE WITNESSES SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. P10:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT. 21.12.99 SUBMITTED BY SMT.K.KUSUMAM & K.I. CHERU BEFORE THE D.E.O. CHAVAKKAD. P11:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY SARAMMA P.A. BEFORE THE D.E.O. CHAVAKKAD. P12:- COPY OF THE REPORT DT. 18.1.00 SUBMITTED BY HEADMISTRESS, ST.GEORGE HIGTH SCHOOL, THOZHIYOOR TO THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION. P13:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 26.9.2000 ISSUED BY MALABAR INDEPENDENT SYRIAN CHURCH, EDUCATION SOCIETY TO THE HEADMISTRESS ST. GEORGE HIGH SCHOOL, THOZHIYOOR. W.P.(C) NO.1730/2001 P14:- COPY OF THE REPORT NO.C.179/2000 . P15:- COPY OF THE CHARGE REPORT DT. 6.1.99. P16:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 23.12.00 . RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS R4(a):- COPY OF THE FINAL ENQUIRY REPORT DT. NIL. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE TSS T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ O.P. No.1730/2001-E ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 26th day of May, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the order, Ext.P5, passed by the Deputy Director of Education whereby he has directed to treat the period of suspension between 21.11.1997 to 19.07.1998 as eligible leave and the period from 20.07.1998 to 05.11.1999 as duty for all purposes. 2. The petitioner was working as Headmistress of the St.George's High School, Thozhiyoor. The petitioner was suspended from service by the Manager on 21/11/1997. This was challenged in appeal under Rule 79 and the revision petition under Section 92. The Government, finally by order dated 13/03/1998 directed to reinstate the petitioner in service. In the light of the refusal of the Manager to reinstate the petitioner, the petitioner had to move the statutory authorities in the matter and by an order dated 20/07/1998, the Deputy Director reinstated the petitioner in service. Still the teacher-in-charge refused to handover the charge and in the meanwhile, the Manager also filed O.P.No.14062/1998 and it was dismissed. Ultimately, the Manager passed an order dated 10/12/1998, reinstating the petitioner. O.P. No.1730/2001 -:2:- 3. Subsequently, an enquiry was conducted with respect to memo of charges dated 01/12/1997. The petitioner denied the charges and ultimately it appears that the charges were not proved. The petitioner thereafter moved the authorities to declare the period of suspension as duty. Ext.P1 is the petition filed before the Government. It is pointed out in paragraph 6 of the writ petition that the annual increments due on 01/06/1998, 01/06/1999 and 01/06/2000 have not been sanctioned. The special increment to the Headmaster on completion of 25 years of service, the benefit of pay revision order, the Onam festival allowance and eligible travelling allowance have also not been sanctioned. The petitioner thereafter filed O.P.No.28999/2000 wherein this Court directed the first respondent to consider and decide Ext.P1. Ext.P2 is the copy of the judgment. It is submitted by the petitioner that the Government by order No.42036-A1/2000/Gl.Edn.(A) dated 23/10/2000 directed to treat the period of suspension as duty and give all consequential benefits. Ext.P3 is the notice issued by the Deputy Director in the matter wherein the above order is mentioned. After hearing, Ext.P5 order is passed. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P5. It is pointed out that when the Government has ordered to treat the period of suspension as duty and pay all benefits to the petitioner the Deputy Director is bound to comply with the directions O.P. No.1730/2001 -:3:- contained therein. It appears that the petitioner was again suspended and ultimately, the Government has passed a fresh order in the concerning disciplinary action against the petitioner by G.O.(Rt)No.3000/06/Gl.Edn., dated 15/07/2006. The operative portion of the said order reads thus:- “1. The punishment of reduction to lower post of HSA with effect from 30/03/2001 as per order No.4/2001 dated 25/09/2002 of the Manager be modified as withholding of two increments without cumulative effect and she may be deemed to have retired as Headmaster with all attended benefits. 2. The suspension periods from 21/11/1997 to 19/07/1998 and from 30/03/2001 to 17/10/2002 be regularised as duty for all purpose except for pay and which will be limited to subsistence allowance and accrual of earned leave. 3. The period during which she had not attended duties excluding the suspension period be regularised granting eligible leave.” 4. In the light of the above binding directions issued by the Government, Ext.P5 cannot be sustained. The same is quashed. In O.P. No.1730/2001 -:4:- paragraph (9) of the counter affidavit of the Manager, it is stated that the first respondent, as seen from Ext.P3 directed the second respondent to treat the period of suspension as duty for all service benefits. 5. Infact, the said aspect has not been considered by the Deputy Director while issuing Ext.P5 order. Apart from that the petitioner is entitled for various other benefits as mentioned in paragraph (6) of the writ petition including annual increments etc. In the light of the above, there will be a direction to the Deputy Director to pass fresh orders. The petitioner will be free to file a representation stating the various benefits to which the petitioner is entitled before the Deputy Director of Education. Appropriate orders shall be passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment. The due benefits will be disbursed without any further delay and at any rate within a period of one month from the date of passing of the order. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms