C MARIANANDAM Vs. GOVT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts of the case which are not in dispute lie in a very short compass. The petitioner was serving as the Headmaster in Hajee Mansoorsha Oriental Arabic High School, the correspondent of which is the third respondent herein. He was dismissed from service by an order dated 1st January 1988 with effect from 4th January 1988. The order of dismissal set out the following six reasons therefor :-

(2.) ADMITTEDLY, no notice was given to the petitioner calling upon him to explain his conduct or show cause against the termination of services. No enquiry of any type was held by the management. The petitioner filed an application on 5th January 1988 before the Chief Educational Officer. Villupuram, complaining against the dismissal order, passed by the management. He sent a reminder on 11th January 1988. The Chief Educational Officer is said to have forwarded the same to the District Educational Officer for action under intimation to the petitioner dated 25th January 1988. As there was no development, the petitioner approached this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer for issue of a writ of certiorarified Mandamus for quashing the order of termination and directing the third respondent school to reinstate the petitioner in service with all back wages.

(3.) ON receipt of notice of motion, the third respondent had entered appearance and filed a counter affidavit. The third respondent raises