Remya Das vs State Of Kerala And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 13998 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 11026 OF 2011
PETITIONER:

          REMYA DAS,LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT
          SREE RUDRA VILASAM UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL, CHURCH LANDING
          ROAD,ERNAKULAM,RESIDING AT, SOBHA NIVAS, NEAR
          BHAGAVATHY VILASAM HIGH SCHOOL, NAYARAMBALAM 692 509.

          BY ADVS.
          SRI.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR (PANAMPALLI NAGAR)
          SRI.K.P.CHANDRASEKHAR
          SRI.LUIZ GODWIN DCOUTH



RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL
          SECRETARY,GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT
          SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

    2     ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
          ERNAKULAM 682 015.

    3     THE MANAGER, SREE RUDRA VILASAM UPPER
          PRIMARY SCHOOL,CHURCH LANDING ROAD,ERNAKULAM, 682 016.

          BY ADVS.
          SMT.P.V.PARVATHI
          SMT.REENA THOMAS
          SRI.L.RAM MOHAN




          SRI. P.M.MANOJ - SR.GP




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.07.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).22838/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 [WP(C) Nos.11026/2011, 22838/2011]
                                   2



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 22838 OF 2011
PETITIONERS:

          MANAGER, SREE RUDRAVILASAM U.P
          SCHOOL, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682016.

          BY ADVS.
          SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE
          SMT.P.V.PARVATHI
          SMT.REENA THOMAS



RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS
          PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,,
          GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT,, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-
          695001.

    2     DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
          ERNAKULAM-682 026

    3     ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
          ERNAKULAM-682 026

    4     REMYA DAS, SHOBHA NIVAS
          NAYARAMBALAM P.O., PIN-682509.

          BY ADVS.
          SRI.K.P.CHANDRASEKHAR
          SRI.LUIZ GODWIN DCOUTH
          SRI.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR PANAMPALLI NAGAR


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.07.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).11026/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 [WP(C) Nos.11026/2011, 22838/2011]
                                   3

                             JUDGMENT

[WP(C) Nos.11026/2011, 22838/2011]

The afore two writ petitions - which have been heard

together on account of the analogous and entwined facts and

circumstances pleaded - were filed in the year 2011.

2. Among the two writ petitions, WP(C) No.22838/2011

has been filed by the Manager of the School by name "Sree Rudra

Vilasam U.P.School", Ernakulam; while the other has been filed

by Smt.Remya Das, who was working as a Lower Primary School

Teacher, therein.

3. The Manager of the School alleges that Smt.Remya

Das is guilty of unauthorised absence and misconduct involving

moral turpitude and says that she was proceeded against, under

the provisions of Rule 75 Chapter XIVA of the Kerala

Educational Rules (KER) by the Assistant Education Officer

(AEO), who found the allegations of unauthorised absence to be

valid. The Manager submits that, however, instead of allowing [WP(C) Nos.11026/2011, 22838/2011]

him to propose a punishment subsequent there to, the AEO issued

an order - which has been produced as Ext.P9 in WP(C)

No.22838/2011 - reinstating the teacher in service.

4. The Manager says that he challenged the report of the

AEO exonerating Smt.Remya Das from the charge of moral

turpitude through a Revision Petition before the Government and

that when they did not grant a stay order, he filed a Review

Petition, and then approached this Court through WP(C)

No.22838/2011, seeking that the aforementioned Revision

Petition and the Review Petition produced as Ext.P12 be directed

to be taken up and disposed of within a time frame.

5. In the meanwhile, Smt.Remya Das, the teacher in

question, approached this Court by filing WP(C) No.11026/2011,

seeking that the order of the AEO re-instating her, namely Ext.P2,

[same as Ext.P9 in WP(c) No.22838/2011] be not interdicted.

6. I have heard Sri.P.Santhoshkumar (Panampilly Nagar)

- learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in WP(C)

No.11026/2011; Smt.Reena Thomas - learned counsel appearing [WP(C) Nos.11026/2011, 22838/2011]

for the petitioner in WP(C) No.22838/2011 and Sri.P.M.Manoj -

the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the official

respondents in both these cases.

7. As I have already said above, the issues in these cases

relate back to more than 10 years. For that reason alone, I am of

the view that disputes between the parties have now become

absolutely stale. I am also certain that many developments must

have taken place in the last 10 years, but the learned counsel for

the parties have not been able to inform this Court about the same,

perhaps because they have also not obtained relevant instructions.

8. However, the learned Senior Government Pleader -

Sri.P.M.Manoj, submitted that Smt.Remya Das has been reinstated

and her period of suspension has also been regularised. He,

therefore, submitted that it would not be necessary for this Court

to now reopen the issues and consider the disputes on merits, due

to efflux of time.

I find substantial force in the suggestion now made by the

learned Senior Government Pleader and am of the view that, it [WP(C) Nos.11026/2011, 22838/2011]

will not be proper to keep these matters pending ad infinitum on

the files of this Court.

In the afore circumstances, I close these writ petitions

without any further orders; however, leaving liberty to the

petitioners to approach this Court for a re-hearing, if they require

any further issue to be decided on its merits.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE SAS/07/07/2021 [WP(C) Nos.11026/2011, 22838/2011]

APPENDIX OF W.P.(C) NO.11026/2011 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.02.2010 OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ERNAKULAM

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05.03.2011 OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ERNAKULAM

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.03.11 OF THE 3RD RESOPONDENT, MANAGER

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 17.03.2011 OF ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER RESPONDENTS' NIL EXHIBITS:-

[WP(C) Nos.11026/2011, 22838/2011]

APPENDIX OF W.P.(C) NO.22838/2011 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28.1.2010 ISSUED TO THE 4TH RESPODNENT

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE 4TH RESPODNENT DATED 15.2.2010

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 11.3.2010

EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE NOTICE PUBLISHED IN THE MATHRUBHUMI DAILY DATED 4.5.2010

EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION ADDRESSED BY THE 4TH RESPODNENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 5.7.2010

EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES ISSUED TO THE 4TH RESPODNENT DATED 27.9.2010

EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 12.10.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPODNENT

EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 3RD RESPODNENT DATED 25.1.2011

EXHIBIT P9 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 5.3.2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE THIRD RESPODNENT

EXHIBIT P10 COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPODNENT DURING JULY 2011 EXHIBIT P0(A) COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED IN EXT.P10 REVISION

EXHIBIT P11 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 9.6.2011 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPODNENT

EXHIBIT P12 COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPODNENT

EXHIBIT P13 COPY OF THE REVISION PETIION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST EXT.P9 ORDER [WP(C) Nos.11026/2011, 22838/2011]

EXHIBIT P14 COPY OF A LOOK OUT NOTICE PUBLISHED BY THE POLICE

EXHIBIT P15 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15.7.2010 SENT BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT'S HUSBAND OT THE MANAGER OF THE SCHOOL

EXHIBIT P16 COPY OF THE PEITION RECEIVED BY THE MANAGER FROM THE TEACHERS OF THE SCHOOL

EXHIBIT P17 COPY OF THE SAID REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPODNENT

EXHIBIT P18 COPY OF THE STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY SMT.T.P.SINDHU

EXHIBIT P19 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 1.1.2011 ISSUED BY THE AEO, ERNAKULAM

EXHIBIT P20 COPY OF THE HEARING NOTICE DATED 13.1.2011 SENT BY AEO RESPODNENTS' EXHIBITS NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE