G PARAMESWARI HEAD MISTRESS, SEVA SANGAM GIRLS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL Vs. JOINT DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, CHIEF EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER AND SECRETARY, SEVA SANGAM GIRLS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard both sides.

(2.) In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the order of the 4th respondent refusing to grant extension of service to the petitioner. The petitioner was working as Headmistress of the 4th respondent School and she will be attaining superannuation on 30.06.2010 and therefore, she is eligible for extension of service till 31.05.2011 and the 4th respondent passed the impugned order, dated 13.05.2010 informing the petitioner that she will not be given extension of service as she was found guilty in respect of misconduct that took place in the year 1998 and in respect of that, an enquiry was conducted by the Joint Director of School Education and the petitioner also confirmed the misconduct in her explanation, dated 05.04.2010 and therefore, the School Committee was convened on 15.04.2010 to consider the action to be taken against the petitioner and as per the resolution of the School Committee, the extension was refused to the petitioner. According to the petitioner, in respect of an incident that took place on 14.05.1998, by the proceedings of the Joint Director of School Education, the first respondent herein, dated 01.09.1999, the petitioner was exonerated and for the same alleged misconduct, action cannot be taken after a lapse of more than 10 years and the petitioner has also not committed any misconduct as alleged by the respondents. It is stated that the alleged misconduct was that on 14.05.1998, the petitioner participated in the counselling held in Trichy, for the post of headmistress and on the same day, she also attended the valuation of (+2) question and answer papers at Kumbakonam as Chief Examiner and therefore on that day, she worked in two different places, which is contrary to the rules and on that basis, action was taken. According to the petitioner, she made it clear that after getting permission from the Officer, she went to attend the counselling at Trichy, which was held at 10.30 a.m. and immediately, thereafter, she attended the evaluation of answer as a Chief Examiner and therefore, she has not committed any illegality to warrant any action. Further, she has stated that there is no question of impersonation and the authorities are also aware of the fact that the petitioner attended the counselling and also attended the work of Chief Examiner for evaluation of answer paper on the same day and therefore, without appreciating these facts, action was taken.

(3.) The 2nd respondent filed a counter stating that in the proceedings of the first respondent, the 4th respondent was directed to take disciplinary action against the petitioner for the misconduct committed on 14.05.1998 and the petitioner herself has also accepted the misconduct in her letter, dated 30.11.2009 that she was present at Kumbakonan on 14.05.1998 and was also present at Trichy on the same day between 10 a.m to 12 noon and considering all these facts, enquiry was ordered to be conducted and order was passed by the 4th respondent and hence, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.