SUDHAKARAN V.K. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was the Head Master of Devi Vilasam AUP School, Ariyallur from 02.02.1996 to 15.06.2010. On the ground that the petitioner had caused loss to the Government, as per Ext.P4 order, the second respondent ordered to recover a sum of Rs.2,09,608/ - from the petitioner. The petitioner challenged Ext.P4 order in W.P.C 27206/2009. As per Ext.P5 judgment, this Court held that steps cannot be initiated against the petitioner for recovery of the loss caused to the Government, without a disciplinary proceedings. Thereupon, disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner by issuing Ext.P6 memo of charges. Ext.P7 is the explanation submitted by the petitioner to the memo of charges. According the petitioner, before finalising the disciplinary proceedings, steps have been taken under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act for recovery of the amounts in respect of which disciplinary proceedings have been initiated. Ext.P9 is the demand notice issued under Section 7 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. Ext.P9 Indicates that the said proceedings are for the recovery of the very same amount involved in the disciplinary proceedings. A counter affidavit has been filed by the second respondent. Paragraph 12 of the counter affidavit reads thus:

(2.) A reply affidavit has been filed by the petitioner to the said counter affidavit. In the reply affidavit, in paragraph 5, petitioner reiterates that he is not served with the order finalising the disciplinary proceedings till date.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner as per Ext.P6 memo of charges is without jurisdiction. This is a contention to be raised by the petitioner before the authority before which the final order in the disciplinary proceedings is challenged.