IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2010 / 8TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 2551 of 2010(T) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- ISMAIL M., S/O. UNNIMOYIN HAJI, PRINCIPAL, RAHMANIYA VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL FOR HANDICAPPED, CALICUT (NOW UNDER SUSPENSION), MANGATT HOUSE, NEAR DEEPA THEATRE, POST MAVOOR, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. MR.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE MANAGER, RAHMANIYA VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL FOR HANDICAPPED, CALICUT-5. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KOZHIKODE. 5. SHRI. M.A.BABY, HON'BLE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER MRR.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SIRI JAGAN, J -------------------- W.P.©.NO.2551 OF 2010 ---------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2010 J U D G N E N T The petitioner was working as Principal of Rahmaniya Vocational Higher Secondary School for handicapped at Kozhikode. About 23 months back, the petitioner was suspended by the manager alleging misconducts involving financial irregularities. Vigilance case was also initiated against the petitioner in respect of the same. The investigation in respect of the same was over. In the meanwhile, the petitioner filed an application for revocation of suspension before the Government. This court by judgment in W.P.(c). No.6898/09, directed disposal of that application. The Under Secretary conducted an enquiry and recommended revocation of suspension. The secretary also agreed with the view expressed by the Under Secretary. The 5th respondent Minister of Education disagreed with them and opined that in view of the serious irregularities alleged against the petitioner, it is not in the interest of the school to reinstate the petitioner. But he opined that the disciplinary proceedings shall be completed within a stipulated time frame. Pursuant to that W.P.©.No.2551 OF 2010 2 Ext.P11 order has been passed by the Government directing that disciplinary proceedings shall be completed in a time bound manner. Therefore the DDE, Kozhikode was directed to complete the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and to forward the report to the manager within two months. On receipt of the enquiry report, the manager was directed to finalise the disciplinary action within two moths. The Manager and DDE were directed to file a report after completion of the entire proceedings. The petitioner is challenging Ext.P11 order. According to the petitioner, The Minister had no jurisdiction to interfere with the matter and he alleges malafides against him. He submits that Ext.P11 has been passed on irrelevant considerations and therefore the same is liable to be interfered by this court. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader. 3. In view of the serious allegations of financial irregularities raised against the petitioner, I am also of opinion that it is in the interest of the school not to reinstate the petitioner at present . In fact, most prudent action in the circumstances is W.P.©.No.2551 OF 2010 3 to direct completion of the disciplinary proceedings with in a time bound manner, which only has been opined by the minister which has found a place in Ext.P11 order. The petitioner has not been able to substantiate his allegations of malafides with any acceptable materials on record. Therefore I do not find any merit in the contention of the petitioner against Ext.P11 order. The writ petition is therefore, dismissed with a direction that the manager and the DDE, Kozhikode to comply with Ext.P11 order promptly. Sd/- SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE SOU. //true copy// P.A. To Judge