S MARIA SEBASTIAN Vs. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ Petition is filed challenging the second show-cause notice dated 10.2.2004 issued by the second respondent in Proceeding No. EDN/K/CM/FI 54/54/2004.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are as follows: While working as a teacher in the third respondent school, on 31.1.2003, the petitioner is said to have valued the revision test papers for the 10th Standard through students. It is further stated that the petitioner beat one student by name C.Sasikumar. With regard to the above incident (i. e.) beating of the student, it appears that a police complaint was lodged by the parents of the student who suffered injury and he was treated in the hospital. The parents gave a complaint to the Headmaster and the education authorities as well. On 3.2.2003, the correspondent of the third school and Others made some enquiries with regard to the incident and in order to find out the reason for the incident, the school appointed one Mr. A.Maria Stephen, advocate to conduct a preliminary enquiry into the episode and submit a report. Such appointment was made by proceedings dated 19.2.2003. The proceedings dated 19.2.2003 was challenged in W.P. No. 6703 of 2003 by the present writ petitioner. The Court based on the counter-affidavit filed by the present respondent school came to the conclusion that the enquiry was preliminary in nature and since no charge memo was issued at that stage, the writ petitioner cannot plead prejudice. The W.P. No. 6703 of 2003 was dismissed with an observation that the school should comply with the undertaking given in paragraph 13 of the affidavit. The third respondent school stated in the counter-affidavit filed in the earlier writ petition that after the preliminary enquiry is conducted, if there is any material to proceed further, then a charge memo will be issued.

(3.) Thereafter, the charge memo was issued on 10.6.2003. In this, the proceedings dated 19.2.2003 appointing the advocate as the preliminary enquiry officer and his report dated 6.6.2003 are referred to in the reference as Serial Nos. 1 and 3 and the order dated 7.4.2003 passed by this Court in earlier W.P. No. 6703 of 2003 is referred to as Serial No. 2.