IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 33188 of 2010(W) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ HARSHAKUMAR S., JUNIOR HINDI TEACHER, S.N.M. U.P.SCHOOL, MUTHUKULAM, ALAPPUZHA (UNDER SUSPENSION), RESIDING AT SUDHALAYAM, MUTHUKULAM SOUTH P.O., ALAPPUZHA. BY ADVS. SRI.S.SANTHOSH KUMAR, SMT.P.LISSY JOSE. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ALAPPUZHA- 688 001. 4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, HARIPAD - 590 614. 5. THE MANAGER, S.N.M. U.P.SCHOOL, MUTHUKULAM, ALAPPUZHA, 690 560. 6. JAYACHANDRAN R., CORRESPONDENT, S.N.M. U.P.SCHOOL, MUTHUKULAM, ALAPPUZHA - 690 560. 7. THE HEADMASTER, S.N.M. U.P.SCHOOL, MUTHUKULAM, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690 560. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.33188 OF 2010 ------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT While the petitioner was working as Junior Hindi teacher in S.N.M.U.P School, Muthukulam in Alappuzha, he was placed under suspension, as per Ext.P1 order dated 28.6.2010 for a period of 15 days. The matter was reported to the Assistant Educational Officer. The Assistant Educational Officer conducted a preliminary investigation into the grounds of suspension, as provided under sub rule 8 of Rule 67 of Chapter XIV A of the KER. After the preliminary investigation, the Assistant Educational Officer passed Ext.P2 order dated 8.7.2010 directing the Manager to reinstate the petitioner in service, after withdrawing the suspension. 2. Against Ext.P2 order, the Manager filed a revision before the Government. In that revision, W.P.(C).No.33188 OF 2010 2 the Manager also prayed for stay of the order passed by the District Educational Officer. As per Ext.P6 order dated 22.9.2010, the Government granted stay of the order passed by the District Educational Officer. On the ground that Ext.P2 order was stayed by the Government, the Manager issued Ext.P4 order dated 13.10.2010 placing the petitioner under suspension pending disciplinary proceedings. The main challenge in the Writ Petition is against Ext.P4 order passed by the Manager. The petitioner has also prayed for other reliefs in the Writ Petition. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the Manager submitted that in compliance with Ext.P2 order, the petitioner was reinstated in service. Later, on the basis of Ext.P6 order, Ext.P4 order was passed and the petitioner was placed under suspension. The learned counsel for the Manager submitted that now the petitioner has been reinstated disregarding Ext.P4 order and therefore, it is not necessary to arrive at any finding on the merits in the Writ Petition. W.P.(C).No.33188 OF 2010 3 4. The position as of now is that Ext.P4 order of suspension dated 13.10.2010, has practically been withdrawn by the Manager in view of the reinstatement of the petitioner made subsequently. Therefore, it is not necessary to consider the legality or otherwise of Ext.P4 order. At the same time, the revision filed by the Manager against Ext.P2 order passed by the District Educational Officer is pending. Reinstatement of the petitioner would not be a bar for considering the revision filed by the Manager. The revision shall be disposed of by the first respondent in accordance with law. Since the Manager has reinstated the petitioner, Ext.P6 stay order has practically become irrelevant. Therefore, it is not necessary to consider whether Ext.P6 is valid or not. 5. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner also may be directed to be heard, while disposing of the revision filed by the Manager challenging Ext.P2 order. W.P.(C).No.33188 OF 2010 4 In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: The first respondent shall consider and dispose of the revision petition filed by the Manager against Ext.P2 order dated 8.7.2010 passed by the Assistant Educational Officer, Haripad, as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the Writ Petitioner and the Manager. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE. cms