C MASANAM Vs. CHIEF EDUCATIONAL OFFICER MADURAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. The appellant is the school teacher, who had worked for sixteen years as such before, his services were terminated without even an enquiry.

(2.) THE appellant joined the services of the second respondent school. This school is fully aided and established and administered by a linguistic minority.

(3.) IN the appeal, the learned Senior Counsel, Mr.K.Chandru appearing for the appellant took the Court through all the facts referred to above. He submitted that the appellant had given detailed answers to the charges framed against him and in addition he had also addressed a representation to the Chief Educational Officer in which again a detailed explanation had been given. The second respondent after having received the letters, insisted on issuing repeated notices levelling the same charges and it is therefore that the appellant kept quiet after stating that he had already stated his defence in the earlier reply. At no point of time had the appellant indicated by his conduct or by his words that he was accepting the charges.