IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 29901 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- LEELAMONY SENIOR SCALE LECTURER IN SANSKRIT S.N.COLLEGE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. UNIVERSITY OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY BUILDING, TRIVANDRUM. 2. VICE CHANCELLOR UNIVRSITY OF KERALA UNIVERSITY BUILDING, TRIVANDRUM. 3. MANAGER, S.N.TRUSTS S.N.TRUST BUILDING, KOLLAM. 4. VELLAPALLI NATESAN, MANAGER S.N.TRUSTS, S.N.TRUSTS S.N.TRUST BUILDING, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, KERALA UTY. FOR R1 & 2 ADV. SRI. A.N RAJAN BABU FOR R3 & R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.29901 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 11th November,2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner herein is working as Senior Scale Lecturer in Sanskrit in S.N College, Kollam. The college is managed by the S.N Trust, the 3rd respondent herein. Petitioner was subjected to disciplinary action by the management. Ext.P3 is the copy of the memo of charges and statement of allegations and Ext.P4 is the reply. It is the case of the petitioner that even though the petitioner participated in the enquiry due to the indecent behaviour transgressing the limit of modesty, the petitioner abstained from the enquiry. Due to various reasons, she did not participate further in the enquiry after submitting the statement as per Ext.P5. Ext.P6 is a copy of the enquiry report served on the petitioner. 2. Relying upon Section 60 (2) of the Kerala University Act, it is contended that the proceedings which were initiated as per Ext.P3 have not been completed within the time limit provided in sub-section (4) and the 3rd respondent had not sought any extension before the Vice Chancellor also. Third respondent is proceeding further in the matter illegally. W.P ( C) No.29901 of 2009 2 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 3 and 4. 4. Final order in the disciplinary proceedings is yet to be issued. What is communicated to the petitioner is only a letter requiring her to submit any objection to the enquiry report. It is up to the petitioner to offer her comments in the matter. Therefore, if ultimately, the final order goes against the petitioner, the petitioner can resort to appropriate remedies available under the Statute. Petitioner can also rely upon the contentions raised herein with regard to the violation of Section 60 (4) of the Kerala University Act. Therefore, leaving open the said remedy, the writ petition is closed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that since the petitioner had filed this writ petition, petitioner did not submit objection to Ext.P6 so far. Petitioner will therefore communicate her objections to Ext.P6 within a period of two weeks from today and the same will be considered by the Management before taking further action in the matter. T.R RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE ma W.P ( C) No.29901 of 2009 3 W.P ( C) No.29901 of 2009 4