K PANDIAN Vs. DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) IT has been stated that the petitioner has been working as a P.G. Assistant in the second respondent school. While so, the petitioner has been placed under suspension, based on the charges levelled against him. The petitioner has stated that the school Committee has not been properly constituted and it has not been recognised by the authorities concerned with school education. Since the school Committee has not been validly constituted it does not have any authority to level charges against the petitioner and to conduct an enquiry based on the said charges. The charge memo given by the Secretary of the school Committee, on 16.4.2001, is invalid, in view of the fact that it is the school Committee which is the competent authority to take disciplinary action, under Section 18(1)(c) of the Tamilnadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973. The order suspending the petitioner from service, the framing of the charges and the proposed enquiry, are illegal and void.

(3.) IT has also been stated that the petitioner has no authority to question the Constitution or the legal status of the Educational Agency or the school Committee, as he has subscribed to the code of conduct, under the Tamilnadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973. The petitioner, who is a member of the Tamilnadu Teaching and Non-teaching Employees Welfare Society, has been attempting to create indiscipline amongst other employees under Nehru Educational Society. If such acts are encouraged it would lead to serious indiscipline amongst the teaching and the non-teaching staff of the second respondent school. Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. The petitioner has to face the enquiry to be held in respect of the charges levelled against him. In such circumstances, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.