IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 38477 of 2010(H) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- P.K.CHANDRASEKHARAN, S/O.KRISHNAN, AGED 63 YEARS, PANDIKASALAKKAL HOUSE, MUNAMBAM P.O.,PALLIPORT, ERNAKULAM PIN-683 515. BY ADVS. SRI.C.A.CHACKO, SRI.N.A.SHAFEEK, SRI.M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN (OASIS). RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 2. KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001. 3. THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 4. THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, ERNAKULAM DIVISION, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM-682 036. R1 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P. NARAYANAN, R2 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR, S.C, K.S.H.B. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/02/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P (C) No. 38477 of 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 4th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner, who is an 'Anganwadi Teacher', is challenging the action on the part of the respondents in keeping her away from the premises, referring to conviction in a criminal case. 2. The case of the petitioner is that, she happened to be one of the accused in S.C. No. 874 of 2009 before the Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc - I) Kozhikode, involving offences under Sections 323, 324, 427 and 308 r/w s. 34 of IPC. On conclusion of the trial, the accused was found guilty and convicted and sentenced accordingly. However, on filing appeal before this Court, the imposition of sentence was suspended as per Ext. P1 order dated 02.12.2009. The petitioner sought to have a re-entry, when clarification was sought for by the second respondent, vide Ext. P2, which was replied by the Director sending Ext. P3 dated 29.12.2009, pointing out that, the petitioner stand already convicted in a case; that the suspension of sentence and releasing on bail will not enable the petitioner to rejoin duty and that the petitioner could be permitted to rejoin duty only on exoneration from charges levelled against her. The case of the petitioner is that, the W.P. (C) No. 38447 of 2010 : 2 : said observation and the course pursued by the respondents is contrary to the norms and guidelines issued by the Director himself as per Ext. P4 dated 21.05.2004. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on clauses (1) and (2) of Ext. P4, saying that, the petitioner's case does not come within the purview of the said clause under any circumstances. According to the petitioner these are the only circumstances under which an Anganwadi employee can be kept away from the duty. 4. Obviously, Ext. P4 is a set of guidelines issued by the Director with regard to the 'Disciplinary Proceedings' to be initiated against the delinquent employees. As per clause (1), if any, delinquency is noted, then the concerned authority could place the delinquent employee under 'suspension pending enquiry'; while the misconducts are arrayed under clause (2). Ext. P4 stands entirely on a different pedestal, when compared with conviction in a criminal case. The petitioner's case does not come within the purview of Ext. P4 and even though the execution of sentence has been suspended by this Court, the conviction still stands as such. Merely for the reason that the sentence has been suspended, it is not open for the petitioner to contend that she is entitled to rejoin duty as a matter of right. W.P. (C) No. 38447 of 2010 : 3 : 5. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with Ext. P3. There is no merit in the writ petition. The Writ Petition fails and it is dismissed accordingly. It is made clear that dismissal of the writ petition will not bar the way of the petitioner in claiming or obtaining appropriate reliefs, if the petitioner is acquitted in the appeal. Sd/ P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd