P. Anuradha vs The State Of Telangana
2023 Latest Caselaw 3766 Tel

    THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI

                     W.P.No. 29498 of 2023

ORDER:

In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a writ of

mandamus by declaring the action of the respondents No.3 and

4 in conducting the enquiry as in violation of principles of

natural justice and therefore illegal, arbitrary and contrary to

the Disciplinary and Appeal Rules, 2002 and consequently to

set aside the show-cause notice dated 06.09.2023 and also the

enquiry report and the suspension order dated 04.10.2023 and

to pass such other order or order in the interest of justice.

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ

petition are that the petitioner was initially appointed as PGT

(Telugu) on contractual basis on 31.10.2011, which was

extended from time to time by the respondent No.3. It is

submitted that the present contract of the petitioner was

extended on 09.07.2021 for a period of three years i.e., from

17.07.2021 to 16.07.2024 as per the terms and conditions

mentioned therein.

PMD,J W.P.No. 29498 of 2023

3. It is submitted that the respondent No.3 has issued

a show-cause notice dated 21.07.2023 seeking the explanation

of the petitioner on the complaint received from one

Mr.Dhanajay Reddy, parent of Master Jivansh Reddy of class-4F

alleging that the petitioner has repeatedly beaten his son in

front of his classmates on 19.07.2023. The petitioner submitted

her explanation vide letter dated 24.07.2023 stating that she

has not caused any harm or pain to Master Jivansh Reddy

intentionally and only in order to maintain discipline in the

class, she had warned him orally but as he was not listening to

the oral instructions, she only patted the child on his back. She

also submitted that she has no intention to hurt the child and

also apologized to the Principal as well as the parents of the

child and assured them that she will not take any such steps in

future. It is submitted that the respondent No.3, without

considering the explanation of the petitioner and the apologies

tendered by her, has proceeded to appoint an Enquiry Officer to

proceed with disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and

on 24.07.2023, one Mr.S.Prabhakar Reddy was appointed as

Enquiry Officer and Mr.K.J.M.Reddy was appointed as

presenting officer. It is submitted that the petitioner has

PMD,J W.P.No. 29498 of 2023

participated in enquiry and thereafter the enquiry report was

submitted holding the petitioner to be guilty of the charges and

thereafter, the respondent No.3 has issued a show-cause notice

dated 06.09.2023 as to why the major punishment of

termination of service as per the Hyderabad Public School

Disciplinary Rules, 2002, should not be imposed since as per

the enquiry report it was proved that the petitioner was guilty of

the charges.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

the said show-cause notice is in the nature of pre-determined

decision to impose the major punishment of termination and

therefore, the same is illegal, arbitrary and in violation of

principles of natural justice. It is submitted that petitioner has

submitted her explanation to the show-cause notice and has

also filed an appeal against the suspension order before the

respondent No.2, but no action has been taken by them and

when the petitioner sent the appeal by registered post

acknowledgment due, the same was refused by the authorities.

She therefore apprehends that her appeal may not be

considered by the authorities.

PMD,J W.P.No. 29498 of 2023

5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner

submitted her arguments extensively in relation to violation of

principles of natural justice in issuing the show-cause notice

and showing pre-determined mind for imposition of the major

punishment of termination of services without accepting her

apology.

6. When the case was came up for admission on

19.10.2023, this Court was pleased to direct the respondents

not to take any further coercive steps pursuant to the show-

cause notice dated 06.09.2023.

7. Learned Standing counsel for the respondents has

filed counter affidavit and also stay vacate petition in I.A.No.2 of

2023 along with the counter affidavit. In view of the same, the

writ petition is heard and is being disposed of at the admission

stage at the behest of both the parties.

8. Learned Standing counsel has taken a preliminary

objection about the maintainability of the writ petition. Learned

counsel for the petitioner submitted that the maintainability of

the writ petition against the Hyderabad Public School has

PMD,J W.P.No. 29498 of 2023

already been argued in another writ petition and therefore, the

same is not being argued at length in this writ petition.

9. Having regard to the rival contentions and the

material on record, this Court finds though the respondents

have raised the ground about the maintainability of the writ

petition against the respondent institution, and the issue has

already heard at length and is pending adjudication in another

writ petition filed by the very same counsel against the

respondent school. Therefore, subject to the outcome of the said

writ petition, this writ petition is being disposed of on the merits

of the issue before this Court.

10. Learned Standing counsel for the respondents

submitted that beating of child in the school would amount to

awarding of Corporal punishment under the Juvenile Justice

(Care and Protection of Children) Act of 2015 and the School

management would also be responsible, if no action is taken by

it against the offending employee. It is submitted that the

respondents have accordingly issued the notice to the petitioner

and an enquiry was conducted, in which the petitioner has

admitted to the incident and has tendered her apology. It is

PMD,J W.P.No. 29498 of 2023

submitted that after perusing the CCTV footage of the said

incident, the Enquiry Officer has come to a conclusion that the

petitioner was guilty of indulging in Corporal punishment and

therefore, a show-cause notice was issued for awarding the

punishment. It is submitted that the said show-cause notice

was in accordance with the principles of natural justice and it is

not a pre-determined decision of the disciplinary authority, but

it was an intention to let the charged officer know about the

probable punishment to be imposed. He placed reliance upon

the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

Hukum Chand Malhotra Vs. Union of India in Civil Appeal

No.288 of 1958, dated 12.12.1958 wherein such a show-cause

notice informing about the proposed punishment, was upheld.

As regards the competence of the authority, who has issued the

show-cause notice, it is submitted that the disciplinary

authority has the authority to issue the suspension order and in

this case, Principal is the disciplinary authority under the

Disciplinary and Appeal Rules for the employees of Hyderabad

Public School. He submitted that these arguments are without

prejudice to his arguments that the respondent school is not

amenable to the writ jurisdiction. He further has sought to play

PMD,J W.P.No. 29498 of 2023

video clipping of the incident by submitting the pendrive.

However, the video clipping of the particular incident was shown

on I-Pad, in which it appeared that the teacher has not patted

the child but has beaten the child. Whether the said Act of

beating was as a punishment or to discipline the child, is not

known. However, this Court is not deciding the issue as to

whether the said Act deserves the punishment of termination of

services as suggested in the show-cause notice.

11. As narrated above, the incident of beating the child

Master Jivansh Reddy by the petitioner herein has happened on

19.07.2023 and an enquiry was conducted and the show-cause

notice was issued on 06.09.2023 and the petitioner was placed

under suspension on 04.10.2023. After going through the

sequence of events and also the material on record, this Court is

satisfied that there is no violation of principles of natural justice

and the petitioner was given sufficient opportunity of presenting

her case. It may be another issue that her apology has not been

accepted by the respondents and therefore, they have issued the

show-cause notice of termination of services, but the said show-

cause is after giving an opportunity to submit her explanation

and also after conducting an enquiry, in which the petitioner

PMD,J W.P.No. 29498 of 2023

has participated. Therefore, there is no violation of any of the

principles of natural justice.

12. In view of the same, this Court does not find any

reason to interfere with the impugned order, however, in the

interest of justice, this Court deems it fit and proper to direct

the respondents to consider the apology tendered by the

petitioner and also the explanation with an open mind and take

a decision without being influenced by what was suggested in

the show-cause notice.

13. This writ petition is disposed of with above

directions. There shall be no order as to costs.

14. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ

petition, shall stand closed.

____________________________ JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI Date: 09.11.2023 bak

PMD,J W.P.No. 29498 of 2023

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI

W.P.No.29498 of 2023

Dated: 09.11.2023

bak