IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 9497 of 2009(F)
1. R.THULASIDAS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
For Petitioner :SRI.P.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :08/04/2009
O R D E R
P.N.Ravindran, J.
==================
W.P.(C) No.9497 of 2009
=====================
Dated this the 8th day of April, 2009.
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri. P.Gopalakrishnan Nair, the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner and Sri. T.T.Muhamood, the learned Government Pleader
appearing for the respondents.
2. The petitioner retired from service on 30.4.2000 while he was
serving as the Headmaster of an aided UP School. While in service, he
was placed under suspension by the Director of Public Instruction by
Ext.P5 order dated 7.1.1998. A departmental enquiry was conducted
against the petitioner. The Enquiry Officer found the petitioner guilty of
the charges. The Manager took the stand that the petitioner is innocent.
The Director of Public Instruction took exception to the conduct of the
Manager and passed Ext.P13 order directing that the period during which
the petitioner was under suspension shall be treated as eligible leave.
Aggrieved by the finding in the enquiry report and the order passed by
the Director of Public Instruction, the petitioner moved the Government
in revision. By Ext.P16 order passed on 10.12.2008, the Government
declined to interfere with the order passed by the Director of Public
Instruction and held that the period of suspension from 7.1.1998 to
19.10.1998 will be treated as duty only for the limited purpose of
pension. Ext.P16 is under challenge in this Writ petition.
WP(C) 9497/09 -: 2 :-
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that
Ext.P16 was passed on a revision petition filed by the petitioner without
notice to and affording him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents on
instructions submits that before Ext.P16 order was passed, the petitioner
was not put on notice or heard. I am therefore prima facie satisfied that
Ext.P16 cannot be sustained. In the result, Ext.P16 is quashed and the
respondents are directed to consider the representation submitted by
the petitioner and pass orders thereon after affording the petitioner and
the Manager a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Final orders in the
matter shall be passed within three months from the date on which the
petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before the Secretary
to Government, General Education Department.
P.N.Ravindran,
Judge.
ess