Madras High Court
M.Stephen vs The District Educational Officer on 12 September, 2024
Author: R.Subramanian
Bench: R.Subramanian
W.A.(MD) No.300 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 12.09.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
W.A.(MD)No.300 of 2024
and
C.M.P.(MD) No.2854 of 2024
M.Stephen ... Appellant
-vs-
1.The District Educational Officer,
Thoothukudi,
Thoothukudi District.
2.The Manager of R.C. Schools,
Tuticorin Diocesan Association Society,
Catholic Bishop House,
Thoothukudi - 628 001. ... Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to allow this Writ
Appeal by setting aside the order, dated 07.03.2022, passed in W.P.(MD)No.
17720 of 2018.
____________
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD) No.300 of 2024
For Appellant : Mr.K.Gurunathan
For R1 : Mr.S.P.Maharajan
Special Government Pleader
For R2 : Fr.S.Savarimuthu
for M/s.Father Xavier Associates
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.]
The appellant is aggrieved by the order of the Writ Court, dismissing his
Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.17720 of 2018.
2. The challenge in the Writ Petition was to the order of the appellate
authority, which rejected the appellant's appeal against the order of the original
authority, dated 20.03.2012, imposing a punishment of stoppage of increment for
one year with cumulative effect on him for certain proved delinquencies. The
Writ Court dismissed the Writ Petition, concluding that the delinquencies,
including the misappropriation of funds belonging to Adi-Dravidar students, were
established. The Writ Court also noted that the disciplinary authority followed the
prescribed procedure, conducting an inquiry through an Enquiry Officer and
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
providing the petitioner with the opportunity to respond to the findings.
Aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present appeal.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant would vehemently contend that
the orders of both the disciplinary authority as well as the appellate authority are
sans reasons and that the objections of the appellant were not properly
considered. The learned counsel for the appellant would also vehemently contend
that the orders are laconic and non-speaking and therefore, should be set aside on
the sole ground that no reasons were provided for imposing the punishment.
4. Contending contra, the learned counsel for the second respondent
Management would submit that given the seriousness of the charges against the
appellant, an Enquiry Officer was appointed. After conducting an enquiry, the
Enquiry Officer found the appellant guilty of most of the charges. The appellant
was given an opportunity to defend himself after furnishing the enquiry report.
The appellant also submitted his explanation. After considering the explanation,
the disciplinary authority concluded that there were no grounds to differ from the
Enquiry Officer's findings. Taking a lenient view, the disciplinary authority had
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
imposed a punishment of stoppage increment for a period of one year with
cumulative effect. The appellate authority also affirmed the said conclusion.
5. We have seen the orders of the authorities. The disciplinary authority
as well as the appellate authority are only quasi judicial authorities and they are
discharging their official functions. They are not expected to write judgments;
rather, they are required to issue orders based on the disciplinary proceedings.
The original authority found the appellant's explanation unsatisfactory and
determined that there were no grounds to differ from the Enquiry Officer's
findings, which concluded that the appellant was guilty of many of the charges.
On appeal by the appellant, the appellate authority has also confirmed the same.
6. A reading of the orders of the authorities reveals that they applied their
mind to the charges and after considering the explanation, reached a conclusion
regarding the quantum of punishment. The Writ Court also noted that the
quantum of punishment is quite meager in light of the proved delinquencies.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7. In the above backdrop, we do not think that there are grounds to
interfere with the appeal. Despite his valiant efforts, the learned counsel for the
appellant is unable to demonstrate that the orders are laconic. We find that some
reasons have been assigned for imposing the punishment. However, we cannot
evaluate the sufficiency of those reasons. Once a disciplinary enquiry has been
conducted and the appellant was given a full opportunity to defend himself, we
do not think we can fault the authorities or the Writ Court for having dismissed
the challenge of the appellant. Therefore, we se no reason to interfere. The Writ
Appeal fails and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected
Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
NCC : No [R.S.M., J.] [L.V.G., J.]
Index : No 12.09.2024
smn2
To
The District Educational Officer,
Thoothukudi,
Thoothukudi District.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
and
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
smn2
and
12.09.2024
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
