LAWS(KER)-1986-11-22

CHERIAN Vs. ANNA S VARGHESE

Decided On November 14, 1986
CHERIAN Appellant
V/S
ANNA S. VARGHESE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Does the Kerala Education Act curtail the ordinary recognised right of the disciplinary authority, the Manager, to accept or reject the findings of the enquiry officer This, in turn, raises the question of interpretation and application of R.75 in Chap.14A of the Kerala Education Rules (KER for short). This question not specifically posed and considered in any decided or reported cases, even according to the counsel for both parties, arises for determination in this writ appeal and the Original Petition under Art.226 of the Constitution. The facts, in brief, are these:

(2.) Disciplinary proceedings were initiated as early as 1973 by the Manager of an Aided Educational Institution, against two members of the non teaching staff, a Clerk, Shri George Thomas and a Menial staff, Shri T. Cherian. Both of them were suspended pending enquiry. The continuance of the suspension became illegal for want of necessary sanction of the educational authorities. The Manager, therefore, adopted the dubious procedure of reinstating them and suspending them afresh. However, they had to be reinstated, but not until they obtained orders from the higher authorities in the Education Departments, the Government and eventually directions from this Court in writ jurisdiction. The conduct of the Manager in refusing to comply with the orders of reinstatement was, strongly condemned by this Court in earlier writ proceedings when he was described as ''recalcitrant". Justice Khalid, as His Lordship then was, observed thus:-

(3.) The Manager, naturally, was disqualified as per the KER and the challenge against that order before this Court was also unsuccessful. By the time, his wife, who was the Headmistress of the institution, retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation and was eligible for the Managership of the School. She thus became the Manager. The disciplinary proceedings against the two delinquent non teaching staff had to be continued The following charge had been framed against Shri George Thomas, the Clerk: