IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 16TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 34151 of 2010(T) PETITIONER: --------------- AUGUSTINE JOSEPH (UNDER SUSPENSION), HEADMASTER, ST.MARY'S HIGH SCHOOL, CHERUPUZHA P.O., PAYYANNUR VIA, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR-670 001. 4. THE CORPORATE MANAGER, THALASSERY DIOCESE, THALASSERY, KANNUR DIST-670 101. 5. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR-670 001. 6. P.BHAGEERATHY, W/O. PEETHAMBARAN, BOOTHANA, CHERUPUZHA P.O., PAYYANNUR VIA, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 511. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SUDHA DEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C). NO. 34151 OF 2010 T ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the Headmaster of St.Mary's High School, Cherupuzha. As per Ext.P1 order dated 5.11.2010, he was placed under suspension by the Deputy Director of Education, Kannur. The petitioner submitted Ext.P2 revision dated 8.11.2010 to the Government to cancel the order of suspension and to reinstate him in service. The allegation against the petitioner was that he had beaten a student. In Ext.P2 it is stated that the complaint was withdrawn and the mother of the student submitted before the Deputy Director of Education that she was not interested in continuing the proceedings. It is also stated that though the mother of the student had filed a complaint before the police station, it was closed on the basis of the mutual understanding and consensus. It is stated that a settlement was arrived at between the parties. The petitioner also pointed out in Ext.P2 revision that though the incident allegedly took place on 29.10.2010, the complaint was filed only on 2.11.2010. Ext.P2 is pending disposal. W.P.(C) NO.34151 OF 2010 :: 2 :: 2. The petitioner has produced an additional document, which is the photocopy of the complaint filed by the mother of the student before police and the endorsement made by her on that complaint. It is seen from the additional document marked as Ext.P3 that the mother of the student stated before the police that no action is required in the matter. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since Ext.P2 revision is pending before the first respondent, it is sufficient, for the time being, to direct the first respondent to consider Ext.P2 revision taking into account Ext.P3 as well. The learned Government Pleader submitted that, as per the instructions received, the matter was not settled between the parties. However, the learned Government Pleader submitted that there is no instruction with regard to what transpired before the Sub Inspector of Police and whether the mother of the student had withdrawn the complaint. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be a direction to the first respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P2 revision as expeditiously as possible and, at any W.P.(C) NO.34151 OF 2010 :: 3 :: rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and the mother of the student (sixth respondent). The first respondent shall take into account the subsequent events including Ext.P3. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition, copy of I.A.No.15956 of 2010 and certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent. It is made clear that the direction to dispose of Ext.P2 revision would not prevent the petitioner from approaching the Deputy Director of Education to invoke his jurisdiction to revoke the order of suspension under law. The petitioner shall also send a copy of the Writ Petition, copy of I.A.No.15956 of 2010 and copy of the judgment by registered post to respondents 4 to 6 and he shall produce proof of the same before the first respondent. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/