VARGHESE Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An interesting question has been referred by a Division Bench relating to the question whether Deputy Director of Education has power or jurisdiction to initiate disciplinary proceedings against a teacher of Higher Secondary School. According to the State, disciplinary proceedings have been initiated under S.12A(2) of the Kerala Education Act, 1958 (in short 'the Act') read with R.67(2) of Chap.14A and R.7 of Chap.14B of the Kerala Education Rules, 1958 (in short 'the Rules').

(2.) Factual position is almost undisputed and the only factual aspect which needs to be noted is that the employee, with whose case the Division Bench was concerned, was placed under suspension pending enquiry. The order of suspension was passed alleging certain irregularities and malpractices in conducting the SSLC examination in the year 1999 at Centre No. 504. The order was challenged by the teacher before this Court in O. P. No. 9361 of 1999, which was dismissed. Against the said judgment the above Writ Appeal was filed. The Division Bench felt that the question is of public importance and needs to be dealt with by a Full Bench and that is why reference was made.

(3.) After promulgation of national educational policy, reorganisation of secondary education was necessitated. The State Government accordingly issued orders in the year 1990 for introduction of Higher Secondary School system. A doubt seems to be lingering as to whether power contained in Chap.14A of the Rules would apply to the Higher Secondary School system. In K. Krishnankutty and Others v. State of Kerala ( 1998 (2) KLJ 301 ) a Division Bench held that Higher Secondary School system is totally outside the scope and applicability of the Rules and therefore Chap.14A of the Rules would have no application. When this decision was placed for consideration of learned Single Judge, he referred to the order dated 1.10.1991 issued by the General Education (HSE) Department, more particularly clause.(M) thereof, to take the view that the concerned authority had jurisdiction to initiate disciplinary action against the concerned teacher.