IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2009 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 12241 of 2009(A) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- RANI P.JOHN, D/O.P.V.JOHN, 48 YEARS, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (SOCIAL STUDIES)(UNDER DISMISSAL), ST.ANTONY'S HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KACHERIPADY, ERNAKULAM (R/AT.BLOCK 5, D3-GALAXY EDIFICE, VAZHAKKALA, KOCHI-21. BY ADVS. MR.V.A.MUHAMMED MR.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-14. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM-30. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. THE CORPORATE MANAGEMENT OF THE TERESIAN CARMELITE SISTERS OF ERNAKULAM, ST.TERESA'S CONVENT, ERNAKULAM, REP. BY THE MANAGER. BY SR GOVT. PLEADER MR.P.K.RAVIKRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2009 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DA DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.12241 of 2009 -------------------------------------- Dated 8th April, 2009 JUDGMENT Heard Sri.V.A.Muhammed, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.P.K.Ravikrishnan, The learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4. In the nature of the order that I propose to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to or hear the fifth respondent. 2. The petitioner was a teacher in St.Antony's Higher Secondary School, Kacheripady managed by the fifth respondent. She was placed under suspension by Ext.P1 order dated 2.8.2001. A memo of charges was served on her. An enquiry was conducted and by Ext.P5 order passed on 11.9.2002, the Manager imposed on her punishment of removal from service with effect from 2.8.2002. The petitoner challenged Ext.P5 order in O.P.No.8054 of 2003 in this Court. By Ext.P6 judgment delivered on 23.8.2007, a learned Single Judge of this Court held that the enquiry against the petitioner was vitiated. The writ petition was accordingly allowed, Ext.P5 was quashed and the management was directed to reinstate the petitioner in service with continuity of service and other benefits except backwages. This Court also observed that it will be open to the management to conduct a fresh WP(C).No.12241/2009 2 enquiry and that the petitioner's claim for backwages will depend upon the result of such enquiry. 3. The fifth respondent challenged Ext.P6 judgment in W.A.No.493 of 2008. By Ext.P7 judgment delivered on 7.3.2008, a Division Bench of this Court set aside Ext.P6 and directed the management to conduct a fresh enquiry. As directed by this Court in Ext.P7 judgment, the management conducted a fresh enquiry through the District Educational Officer. The enquiry officer found the petitioner guilty of the charges. Thereupon the Manager issued Ext.P11 notice calling upon the petitioner to show cause why the punishment of dismissal from service should not be imposed on her. The Manager also sought the prior permission of the Deputy Director of Eduation to impose on the petitioner the said punishment. By Ext.P14 order passed on 16.12.2008 the Deputy Director of Education, Ernakulam granted sanction to impose on the petitioner the punishment of dismissal from service. Thereupon Ext.P15 order was passed on 27.2.2009 imposing on the petitioner the punishment of dismissal from service with effect from the date on which she was placed under suspension. The petitioner has aggrieved by Ext.P15 order filed Ext.P16 appeal under Rule 84 of Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Educational Rules before the Director of Public Instruction. In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges Ext.P15 on various grounds. She also prays for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the WP(C).No.12241/2009 3 second respondent to consider Ext.P16 appeal and pass orders thereon within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. 4. Rule 80 of Chapter XIV A of the K.E.R. stipulates that a teacher shall be entitled to appeal from an order imposing on him any of the penalties specified in Rule 65 to the next higher authority to whom the former authority is subordinate. Rule 81 stipulates that where sanction has been accorded for the imposition of any of the penalties by any authority, then the appeal shall lie to the next higher authority to whom the authority who accorded sanction is subordinate. In the instant case, the order imposing punishment of dismissal from service was passed with previous sanction of the Deputy Director of Education. Therefore, the appeal under Rules 80 and 81 of Chapter XIV A of the K.E.R will lie to the Director of Public Instruction. As per Rule 82, period of limitation prescribed for filing an appeal is two months from the date on which the appellant received the order appealed against. In the instant case, the order appealed against was passed on 27.2.2009. The period of limitation prescribed in Rule 82 is yet to expire. The petitioner has even within the said period filed Ext.P16 appeal. The petitioner has also stated that the appeal was presented as required under Rule 84 of Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Education Rules before the Director of Public Instruction. Though the petitioner has challenged Ext.P15 order in this writ petition, since she has invoked the appellate power of the Director of Public Instruction, I WP(C).No.12241/2009 4 do not propose to go into the merits of the petitioner's contentions at this stage. The petitioner was placed under suspension on 2.8.2001. The disciplinary proceedings was pending for the past more than seven years. The punishment imposed is one of dismissal from service with effect from 2.8.2001. Such being the situation, I am of the opinion that the appeal filed by the petitioner challenging Ext.P15 should be disposed of expeditiously. I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the Director of Public Instruction to consider Ext.P16 appeal filed by the petitioner challenging Ext.P15 order of dismissal from service and pass orders thereon after affording the petitioner and the fifth respondent, a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Final orders in the matter shall be passed within four months from the date on which the petitioner produces a copy of the writ petition along with a certified copy of this judgment. The contentions of both sides on the merits are kept open. P.N.RAVINDRAN Judge TKS