M MAGUDAPATHI Vs. MANAGER AND CORRESPONDENT SAVARIYAPPA UDAYAR MEMORIAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL RAYAPPANPATTI MADURAI DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED against the order of the first respondent dated 24. 7. 1995 dismissing the petitioner from service, he has filed the present writ petition for quashing the same and consequential direction for re-instatement with all backwages and other benefits.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner as seen from the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition is briefly stated hereunder:- Since the first respondent school being a minority institution, the provisions relating to approval, appeal and other provisions of Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973 are not applicable as per the Division Bench judgment of this Court, dated 22. 4. 1976, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Art. 226 of the constitution of India. It is contended that the entire charges from charge No. 1 to 10 which is found in the impugned order of dismissal would reveal that they are for the alleged complaint against the wrong administration of the first respondent school which is said to have been sent by one V. Palanisamy, who is nothing to do with the petitioner herein. THE impugned order of dismissal is liable to be dismissed on the sole ground that the first respondent who had given the charge had himself become the disciplinary authority and enquiry authority. Further the first respondent have violated the principles of natural justice by not providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to put forth his defence. THE series of replies and demand from the petitioner from 11. 5. 1993 to 10. 7. 1995 would reveal that the entire enquiry was conducted in a manner totally disregard of principles of natural justice with the sole purpose of vindictive motive against the petitioner and five other teachers. In those circumstance, he has approached this Court for the necessary relief as stated above.

(3.) IN support of the above submissions he has relied on the following decisions: (a) A. Casmir & Others v. The Joint Director of schools (Education) (Higher Secondary) College Road, Madras 6 and 2 others, 1996 W. L. R. 470; (b) N. Sampathu v. The Chief Educational Officer, Vellore and others, 1989 (2) M. L. J. 263; (c) Order in P. Mohan v. Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies corporation Limited, W. P. 8075 of 1995 dated 4. 3. 1996.