IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 16TH OCTOBER 2009 / 24TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 20773 of 2008(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- R.K. SULOCHANA, W/O MADHUSOODANAN, AGED 47 YEARS, HEADMISTRESS, (UNDER SUSPENSION) THERUR U.P. SCHOOL, POST EDAYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.M.RAMESH CHANDER. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.. 3. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,MATTANNUR. 4. THE MANAGER, THERUR U.P. SCHOOL, POST EDAYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. 5. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR. R1 TO R3 & R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. V.T.K. MOHANAN, R4 BY ADV. MR.POOVAMULLE PARAMBIL ABDULKAREEM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/10/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.20773/2008-W: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE ASST. EDUCATIONAL OFFICER DT. 26/03/2007. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE ORDER SUSPENDING PETITIONER ON 09/10/07. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 12/02/2008. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE ASST. EDUCATIONAL OFFICER DT. 17/11/2007. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE R.3. DTD. 03/03/2008. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE MEMO ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE R.1. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DT. 26/10/2007. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE REVISION FILED BEFORE THE R.1. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.1. IN THE REVISION PETITION. EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE REPORT. EXT.P.12: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE R.1. DT. 02/06/2008. EXT.P.13: COPY OF THE ATTENDANCE REGISTER. EXT.P.14: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B5/14417/08/K DIS. DTD. 08/08/08 ISSUED BY DY. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR. EXT.P.15: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.M/1936/2009 OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION DTD. 07/04/2009. EXT.P.16: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. ORDER NO.4/2007 OF THE R.4. DT. 07/08/2009. EXT.P.17: COPY OF THE REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 24/08/2009. EXT.P.18: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. A.3359/2006 OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MATTANNUR, DTD. 09/09/2009. W.P.(C). NO.20773/2008-W: RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R4.A: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B5/1417/08/K. DIS. DTD. 08/08/2008 ISSUED BY THE R.5. EXT.R4.B: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. A 3359/2006 DTD. 22/10/2007 ISSUED BY THE R.3. EXT.R4.C: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.4/07 DTD. 24/10/2007 ISSUED BY THE R.4. EXT.R4.D: COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES ALONG WITH STATEMENT OF ALLEGATION DTD. 12/11/2007 ISSUED BY THE R.4. EXT.R4.E: COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL MEMO OF CHARGES ALONGWITH STATEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS DTD. 29/03/2008 ISSUED BY THE R.4. EXT.R4.F: COPY OF THE PETITION DTD. 28/02/2008 SUBMITTED BY THE R.4. TO THE R.1. EXT.R4.G: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE R.3 REGARDING FORGERY BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, KUTHUPARAMBA. EXT.R4.H: COPY OF THE MEMORIAL DTD. 22/09/2008 SUBMITTED BY THE R.4. BEFORE THE R.1. EXT.R4.I: COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DTD. 29/07/2009. EXT.R4.J: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 05/08/2009 IN W.A. NO. 1726/2009. EXT.R4.K: COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A. NO. 49/2008 IN O.S. NO. 11/2008. EXT.R4.L: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 07/08/2009 TO THE A.E.O MATTANNUR. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.20773/2008-W ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 16th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein while working as Headmistress of a school was suspended from service as per Ext.P2. The Assistant Educational Officer refused to extend the suspension as per Ext.P4 order. Again the Assistant Educational Officer, on the request of the petitioner, directed the Manager to handover the charge to the Headmistress as per Ext.P5. The Manager challenged the same before the Government and, Ext.P12 is the order passed by the Government whereby the order passed by the Assistant Educational Officer was set aside. The Government further directed to conduct an enquiry into the whole episode and finalise the disciplinary action against the petitioner within two months. The same is under challenge in this writ petition. The fourth respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit in the matter supporting the action taken against the petitioner. 2. This Court after hearing the parties passed an interim order dated 29/07/2009 whereby the Manager was directed to finalise the disciplinary proceedings. It was also observed that the final order to be passed shall not be implemented without obtaining orders from this Court. W.P.(C). No.20773/2008 -:2:- 3. Subsequently, the Manager has finalised the proceedings as per Ext.P16. As per Ext.R4(l), the Manager sought to impose the punishment of reversion, on the petitioner, as U.P.S.A. Permission for the same stands declined by the Assistant Educational Officer as per Ext.P18. The Manager has filed a revision before the Government on 22/09/2009 and the same is pending. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that since the enquiry is now over, the petitioner may be ordered to be reinstated in service. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the Manager that since the disciplinary proceedings is yet to be finalised by awarding proper punishment, the petitioner cannot be reinstated in service. The learned counsel relied upon a judgment of this Court in W.A.No.2393/2008, dated 17/12/2008, to contend that the disciplinary proceedings will not be over until imposition of punishment. Presently, going by Ext.P18 produced along with I.A.No.10804/2009, the Assistant Educational Officer did not grant prior permission for the reversion of the petitioner from the post of Headmistress to the post of U.P.S.A. The Manager is directed to give a minor punishment to the incumbent. This direction is issued after finding that the petitioner has become a scape goat in the Management dispute, W.P.(C). No.20773/2008 -:3:- between one Shri V.R.Bhaskaran and the present Manager. The question is, therefore, whether the suspension can be extended merely because the revision petition filed by the Manager is pending before the Government. 5. I am of the view that in the light of the factual position emerging and in the light of the fact that the enquiry has already been completed, it is not necessary to keep the petitioner under suspension awaiting the decision of the Government in the revision petition filed by the Manager. In fact, in Ext.P12 the Government while setting aside the order passed by the Assistant Educational Officer directed the Manager to conduct an enquiry into the matter and finalise the disciplinary action. The said order is dated 02/06/2008. The time allowed by the Government was two months. Only pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court dated 29/07/2009 the Manager has finalised the action now. 6. The learned counsel for the Manager then submitted that in the light of Ext.R4(k) order passed by the Munsiff Court, Kuthuparamba in I.A.No.49/2008 in O.S.No.11/2008, the Headmistress cannot enter the school even if she is ordered to be reinstated. A perusal of the order shows that the injunction was granted only on the ground that the Headmistress is placed under suspension and is continuing as such. Therefore, the said W.P.(C). No.20773/2008 -:4:- order cannot deter this Court from granting an order directing reinstatement to the petitioner. As the enquiry stands finalised by the Manager, everything except imposition of penalty is complete. It depends upon the fate of the revision petition pending. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of in the following terms:- The petitioner will be reinstated in service as Headmistress within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The revision petition filed by the Manager before the Government dated 22/09/2009 will be heard and disposed of by the Government within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The reinstatement of the petitioner will be subject to the outcome of the revision petition filed by the Manager. The claim of the petitioner for salary and other allowances will also depend upon the outcome of the revision petition filed by the Manager. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms