IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2008 / 23RD ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 24654 of 2007(I) -------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: -------------------- DEEPA JOSE, LECTURER IN ENGLISH, ST.THOMAS COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, PALA. BY ADV. SRI.KKM.SHERIF SRI.P.M.KUNJIMOIDEENKUTTY SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN RESPONDENT: --------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION (D) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE MANAGER & PRINCIPAL ST.THOMAS COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, PALA. ADV. SRI.GEORGEKUTTY MATHEW FOR R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.T.B.RAMANI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.24654/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT. 24.9.03. P1(a):- COPY OF THE SANCTION ORDER DT. 25.9.03. P1(b):- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.1A-462/03 DT. 25.10.03. P1(c):- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT. 15.10.03. P1(d):- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.12014/03/2004/H.EDN. DT. 11.5.04. P2:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.26046/D3/2004/H. EDN. DT. 1.10.04. P3:- COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE DT. 23.12.04. P3(a):- COPY OF THE SANCTION ORDER DT. 23.12.04. P4:- COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE DT. 20.12.05. P4(a):- COPY OF THE SANCTION ORDER DT. 20.12.05. P5:- COPY OF THE LETTER NOI.13A-1386/2005 DT. 20.12.05. P6:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.B4-1933/2005 DT. 23.1.06. P7:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.D1/22202/05/COL. EDN. DT. 16.5.05. P8:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT. 28.6.05. P8(a):- COPY OF THE CHALAN NO.1412 DT. 21.2.05. P9:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.D1 22202/05/H.EDN. DT. 23.7.05. P10:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT. 16.11.05. P11:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.D1/22202/2005/COLL. EDN. DT. 3.6.06. P12:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.D1/22202/05/COLL. EDN. DT. 2.4.07. P13:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION D1/22202/2005 COLL. EDN. DT. 14.6.07. P14:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION. DT. 09.8.06. /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 24654 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 15th day of October 2008 J U D G M E N T The prayer sought for in this writ petition is to quash Exts.P11, P12 and P13 and to direct the first respondent to grant concurrence to Exts.P3 and P4 applications made by the petitioner for leave without allowance or in the alternative to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to rejoin duty. 2. Petitioner was a Lecturer under the 4th respondent since 27.9.1991. While continuing so, petitioner availed of leave without allowance from 1.1.2004 to 31.12.2005. That was granted by the 4th respondent subject to prior concurrence and concurrence was also granted. After availing of the leave as above, petitioner requested for cancellation of the unavailed portion and rejoined duty with effect from 1.6.2004. This was allowed and the petitioner had joined duty. 3. Thereafter, the petitioner again applied for leave without W.P.(C) No.24654 OF 2007 -2- allowance for the period 24.12.2004 to 23.12.2005, followed by yet another application for the period 24.12.2005 to 31.5.2008. Exts.P3 and P4 show that, though the Manager sanctioned the leave, the same was subject to prior concurrence of the first respondent. 4. According to the Government Pleader, the concurrence was not granted by the Government but the petitioner remained absent from duty for the whole of the aforesaid period. Finally, the request is also seen rejected by the Government as per Ext.P11 and thereafter the Manager was directed to take disciplinary action against the petitioner. It would also appear that an action taken report was called for from the 4th respondent Manager as per Ext.P13. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, during this period, though the petitioner made attempts to rejoin duty, that was not permitted. 5. However, the fact remains that, without obtaining leave in the manner as prescribed, the petitioner was unauthorizedly absented during the period from 24.12.2004 onwards. Evidently this is a misconduct and the respondents were justified in initiating action against the petitioner. Counsel for the 4th respondent submits that W.P.(C) No.24654 OF 2007 -3- in view of the pendency of this writ petition, they have not taken any further proceedings pursuant to Exts. P11 to P13 issued by the 2nd respondent. 6. Although the conduct of the petitioner may spell out misconduct, still disciplinary proceedings have not been concluded against the petitioner. If that be so, in view of Exts. P11 to P13, it is only appropriate that the Manager takes further proceedings in pursuance to Exts. P11 to P13 and conclude the same on an expeditious basis. Counsel for the petitioner submits that though requests were made for rejoining duty she has not been admitted to duty. Apart from producing Ext. P14, a representation addressed to the Minister for Education, petitioner has not produced any document addressed to the Manager with this request. If the petitioner makes a request in this behalf, it is for the Manager to take appropriate decision in this matter and with that direction the writ petition is disposed of. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-