Kerala High Court
The Manager vs The State Of Kerala on 7 April, 2025
Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
WA No.648 of 2025 1 2025:KER:30195
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1947
WA NO. 648 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.03.2025 IN WP(C) NO.13201 OF
2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/5TH RESPONDENT :
THE MANAGER
HIGH SCHOOL, PENGAMUCK,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680544
BY ADVS.
NISHA GEORGE
GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.)
A.L.NAVANEETH KRISHNAN
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 AND PETITIONER :
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT ANNEXE - II,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014
3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680003
4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680506
WA No.648 of 2025 2 2025:KER:30195
5 SHANOJ C. G
AGED 49 YEARS
SON OF C. M. GEORGE, HEADMASTER (UNDER SUSPENSION),
HIGH SCHOOL, PENGAMUCK, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 544.
( RESIDING AT CHEERAN HOUSE, PENGAMUCK, THRISSUR
DISTRICT), PIN - 680544
BY ADV. SMT RESMITHA RAMACHANDRAN,GP
ADV. V A MOHAMMED
SMT.PA JENZIA
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.04.2025,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA No.648 of 2025 3 2025:KER:30195
DR. A.K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR &
EASWARAN S., JJ.
--------------------------------
W.A. No.648 of 2025
------------------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of April, 2025
JUDGMENT
Easwaran S.,J.
This intra court appeal is preferred by the 5th respondent in the writ petition aggrieved by the directions issued by the learned Single Bench in W.P.(C) No.13201 of 2025.
2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of this writ appeal are as follows:
The 5th respondent/writ petitioner was the Headmaster of High School, Pengamuck, Thrissur. On 30.5.2024, the writ petitioner was placed under suspension by the appellant/Manager. Since the provisions of Chapter XIV-A Rule 67 mandates approval of the educational authorities for the purpose of extending the period of suspension from 15 days, the Manager moved the Deputy Director of Education (DDE), Thrissur who, by order dated 13.6.2024 refused to extend the period of suspension beyond 15 days. Accordingly, the appellant herein was directed to reinstate the writ petitioner in service forthwith. Since the WA No.648 of 2025 4 2025:KER:30195 appellant /Manager did not oblige, it is stated that the writ petitioner assumed charge by himself. This led the appellant/Manager initiating fresh disciplinary proceedings against the writ petitioner by issuing a memo of charge dated 21.10.2024. Since no action was taken by the departmental authorities, the appellant/Manager approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.7683 of 2025 and the Deputy Director of Education was directed to dispose of the representation filed by the appellant within a period of two weeks. In pursuance of the said direction, the Deputy Director of Education had notified a date of hearing, and the notice of hearing was directed to be served on the appellant/Manager through Head Master/writ petitioner. Alleging that the writ petitioner deliberately did not serve the notice on the appellant/Manager, in pursuance to the notice issued by the department, the appellant/Manager proceeded to place the writ petitioner on suspension by order dated 27.03.2025 (Ext.P8). As against Ext.P8, the writ petitioner preferred a representation (Ext.P9) before the Deputy Director of Education and approached this Court seeking an expeditious disposal of Ext.P9 representation. The learned Single Judge who considered the writ petition, issued a direction to the Deputy Director of Education, to take up Ext.P9 and pass appropriate orders within a period WA No.648 of 2025 5 2025:KER:30195 of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment and till such time, the order of suspension was directed to be kept in abeyance. It is aggrieved by the aforesaid decision that the appellant/Manager has preferred the present appeal.
3. Heard Sri. A.L. Navaneeth Krishnan, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, Smt. P.A. Jenzia, the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and Smt. Resmitha Ramachandran, the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 4.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant vehemently submitted that the writ petitioner had suppressed the material facts and approached this Court. It is further submitted that the writ petition was disposed of at the admission stage and, by virtue of the interdiction granted by the learned Single Judge, the writ petitioner is now continuing in service as Headmaster. It is submitted that there is serious allegations against the writ petitioner having usurped the office even before the appellant/Manager could issue a consequential order for implementing the directions contained in the order dated 13.6.2024 of the Deputy Director of Education. Such unilateral assumption of charge is not permissible under the provisions of the Kerala Education Rules and thus it is contended that the learned Single Judge could not have WA No.648 of 2025 6 2025:KER:30195 permitted the writ petitioner to continue while the representation was being considered.
5. On the other hand, Smt. Resmitha Ramachandran, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 and Smt. Jenzia, the learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent/writ petitioner would submit that in pursuance to the direction issued by the learned Single Judge, the Deputy Director of Education had scheduled the hearing of Ext.P9 representation on 11.4.2025.
6. On consideration of the rival submissions raised across the Bar, we find that the appellant/Manager has not made out any case for interference in respect of the directions issued by the learned Single Bench. We noticed that as per order dated 13.6.2024, the Deputy Director of Education had specifically directed the Manager to reinstate the teacher in service. On failure of the Manager to issue a consequential order, the teacher was entitled to assume charge on his own since, going by the provisions of sub-rule (8) of Rule 67, he is deemed to be in service on the Educational authority refusing to extend the period of suspension. The trigger for the present writ petition seems to be that the writ petitioner failed to communicate the notice scheduling the hearing of the further proceedings to be taken in respect of the memo of charge issued WA No.648 of 2025 7 2025:KER:30195 by the appellant/manager against the teacher in respect of unilateral assumption of the charge pursuant to the order dated 13.6.2024. However, we notice the fact that the petitioner had produced sufficient materials in the writ petition to show that despite his best efforts, the notice on the appellant/Manager could not be served personally but, in fact, it was served through WhatsApp message. Therefore, it becomes inevitable for us to conclude that the present action of the Manager was totally unwarranted in the facts and circumstances of the case.
7. Be that as it may, the facts presented before us disclose that these matters are gaining the attention of the Deputy Director of Education in Ext.P9 representation. Since the Deputy Director of Education has scheduled the hearing on 11.4.2025, we deem it appropriate not to pronounce finally our views in respect of the proceedings that are gaining attention before the Deputy Director of Education. Therefore, inasmuch as the parties are being directed to appear before the Deputy Director of Education on 11.4.2025, we feel that the further consideration of the writ appeal becomes absolutely unnecessary. Since the learned Single Judge has only exercised his discretion in directing the order of suspension to be kept in abeyance till WA No.648 of 2025 8 2025:KER:30195 a decision is taken on Ext.P9, we find no reason to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Bench.
8. Accordingly, the writ appeal fails and the same is dismissed. The Deputy Director of Education shall proceed to consider Ext.P9 in accordance with the law, on its merits, untrammelled by the observations made by the learned Single Judge or by us in this appeal. We make it clear that the observations made by us in this appeal are only a prima facie view made only for the purpose of disposal of the writ appeal and the Deputy Director of Education is free to take its own decision depending upon the facts presented before him.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
DR. A.K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE Sd/-
EASWARAN S.
JUDGE
NS
WA No.648 of 2025 9 2025:KER:30195
APPENDIX OF WA 648/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 8.5.2024
SUBMITTED BY ONE SHIJU
Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 20.5.2024
SUBMITTED BY ONE SMT. SMIJA M.J.
Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 9.3.2021
SUBMITTED BY ONE HAMSA
Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE MEMO AND THE
STATEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS NO. 1346/2024 DATED 30.5.2024 ISSUED BY THE APPELLANT TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT Annexure A5 TRUE COPY OF THE PRINTOUT OF SCREEN SHORT OF THE WHATSAPP POSTING BY THE WRIT PETITIONER IN WHATSAPP GROUP Annexure A6 TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE MEMO AND STATEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS NO. 1362 DATED 21.10.2024 ISSUED BY THE APPELLANT MANAGER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT HEREIN Annexure A7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY C. NO. 106/2024-25 DATED 31.10.2024 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT HEREIN TO THE APPELLANT MANAGER Annexure A8 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST NO. 1363/2024 DATED 28.11.2024 GIVEN BY THE APPELLANT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT Annexure A9 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.2.2025 IN W.P. (C) NO. 7683/2025 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT Annexure A10 TRUE COPY OF THE SCREEN SHORT OF THE E-MAIL COMMUNICATION DATED 17.3.2025 Annexure A11 TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL COVER EVIDENCING RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE BY THE APPELLANT WA No.648 of 2025 10 2025:KER:30195 Annexure A12 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 19.03.2025 Annexure A13 TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL COMMUNICATION DATED 28.03.2025 ISSUED BY THE WRIT PETITIONER.