SHINY AUGUSTINE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is working as an Assistant Section Officer in the services of the Cochin University of Science and Technology (CUSAT), has approached this Court against Exts.P7 and P9 orders issued by the said University, as per which, she has been asked to appear before the Medical Board for evaluation of her fitness, to continue in their employment and informing her that the period prior to her appearance before the said Board will be treated as eligible leave as a special case. The petitioner says that Ext.P7 is an intrusion into her privacy; while the consequent Ext.P9(a) communication from the General Hospital, Ernakulam, asking her to appear before the Medical Board, is illegal and unlawful. The petitioner, therefore, prays that Exts.P7 and P9 be set aside.

(2.) In response to the submissions of the petitioner made by her learned counsel Sri.John Mani, the learned standing counsel for the CUSAT, Sri.Aravindakshan Pillai, submitted that a very detailed counter affidavit has been placed on record, wherein, the reasons that led the University to issue Ext.P7 order have been enumerated. He submitted that the petitioner has been acting in a very disruptive and violent manner and that there are several complaints and allegations against her made by various persons, including the Branch Manager of a Bank in which she has an account. He added to the submissions by saying that, in fact, the University is trying to help the petitioner by evaluating whether she has any mental challenges, so that she can then be treated and brought back into service without any cause for complaints in future. The learned standing counsel concluded his submissions by saying that if the petitioner does not want to do so, then the only option left with the University will be to initiate action on the basis of each complaint that has been made against her.

(3.) When I heard Sri.Aravindakshan Pillai on the afore lines, I pointedly asked Sri.John Mani whether his client would like to take the benefit of a medical evaluation or whether she would be willing to face the consequences of all the complaints against her. Sri.John Mani submitted that his client is not willing to go through the medical evaluation and that she is confident that if an enquiry is initiated against her, she will be able to prove all the allegations against her to be untenable.