IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2009 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 30678 of 2009(D) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- F.SHERIFA BEEVI, JUNIOR ARABIC TEACHER, JUNIOR BASIC SCHOOL, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY MR.KRB.KAIMAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE ADV. MR.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL MR.V.MADHUSUDHANAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, FARIDKOT HOUSE, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI-110 001. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 6. THE HEADMISTRESS, J.B.S., NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. R2 TO R5 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.MUHAMOOD T.T. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.30678 of 2009-D - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of October, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner herein is working as Junior Arabic Teacher in Junior Basic School, Neyyattinkara. She is aggrieved by the recovery being effected from her salary pursuant to an order issued by the National Human Rights Commission. 2. On 18.1.2005 while the petitioner was teaching the pupils of Standard III, a ball pen held on her hand got slipped and it had hit on the face of a student by name Master Al Ameen. It appears that this caused injury to the eye of the student who was immediately taken to the nearby hospital and then taken to the hospital at Thiruvananthapuram. 3. The present proceedings is an off-shoot of the above incident. It appears that the incident got widespread publicity and ultimately the matter was taken notice by the National Human Rights Commission and the Commission recommended the State Government to pay Rs.50,000/- to the child. Thereafter, the Government passed Ext.P3 order authorising the Director of Public Instruction to draw and disburse the amount of Rs.50,000/- mentioned in the order of the Commission and to take action wpc 30678/2009 2 against the teacher to recover the amount. 4. The petitioner is aggrieved by the action to recover the entire amount from the salary and that too, without any notice and without initiating any action under the relevant rules. In fact, Ext.P3 mentions about the provisions of KCS (CC & A) Rules, particularly sub clause (a) of clause (iv) of Rule 11. It is the case of the petitioner that no action had been initiated against the petitioner under the relevant rules and therefore the recovery from pay is unjustified. It is in these circumstances the petitioner moved the Government by Ext.P10 seeking to review the direction in Ext.P3 to recover the amount. 5. But in the meanwhile, recovery has already been sought to be made against the petitioner by deducting from the monthly salary to the tune of Rs.1,500/-. The relevant Communication in this regard is Ext.P11. 6. The petitioner has also disputed the liability, by Ext.P12 before the 4th respondent, wherein she has requested to keep in abeyance all recovery proceedings till a final decision is taken by the Government on Ext.P10. 7. Heard learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Govt. Pleader. 8. Since Ext.P10 representation is pending before the Government, it wpc 30678/2009 3 is up to the Government to take a decision in accordance with law and therefore the matter will be considered and orders will be passed after hearing the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till orders are passed, the further recovery of amount by way of deduction from monthly salary on the basis of Ext.P11 will be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/