U. MOHNAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is the President of the Parent-Teacher Association of the 4th respondent's school, challenges the orders issued by the 3rd respondent directing reinstatement of the 5th respondent in service. It is stated that the 5th respondent had been placed under suspension with effect from 24.6.2015, since a criminal case had been charged against him. He had approached this Court filing W.P(C).No.32017 of 2015 and by judgment dated 1.4.2016, this Court had closed the writ petition permitting the 5th respondent to avail of the appellate remedy available to him under Rule 79 of Chapter XIV-A KER. It is stated that the 3rd respondent has now issued Exhibit P4 order directing the reinstatement of the 5th respondent on the sole ground that the suspension had continued for a long period.

(2.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the 5th respondent had been placed under suspension on the initiation of a criminal investigation against him for the commission of the offence of rape and that the reinstatement ordered without even considering the gravity of the offence is per se illegal and unsustainable.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed by the 5th respondent contending that the petitioner has absolutely no locus standi to maintain the writ petition, since the Manager had not approached this Court against the order of reinstatement. It is stated that the charges against the 5th respondent were the result of personal vengeance and a family dispute. It is stated that anticipatory bail had been granted by this Court and the 5th respondent had never been arrested or apprehended in connection with any crime. It is stated that suspension having been extended by the 3rd respondent, the 3rd respondent had the power to issue Exhibit P9 order of reinstatement exercising the powers of revocation of suspension.