T. B. RAVICHANDRAN Vs. CHIEF EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THALLAKULAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The charge memo dated 12.02.2014 is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) When the case was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 3 & 4/School made a submission that the writ petitioner has misguided this Court by filing a writ petition without even enclosing the first page of the charge memorandum issued to him in proceeding, dated 12.02.2014. The first page of the charge memorandum categorically enumerates that based on the resolution, dated 01.02.2014, the Management has taken a decision to institute a disciplinary proceedings and issued the charges. By not enclosing the first page, the present writ petition is filed raising a ground that the School Committee has not passed any resolution. Thus, the very filing of the writ petition itself is misleading the Court and by suppressing the first page of charge memorandum, the writ petitioner has obtained an order of interim stay and kept the matter pending for about 5 years.

(3.) Hearing such an arguments made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the School, this Court has verified the typed set of papers filed by the writ petitioner, which shows that the impugned order starts with page No.27. Annexure-I provides Articles of charge and the proceedings issued by the Secretary of the School, dated 12.02.2014 has not been enclosed along with the charge memo. Thus, the writ petitioner has obtained an order of interim stay by suppressing the fact that the School Committee passed a resolution and by not enclosing the proceedings issued by the Correspondent on 12.02.2014. Though the writ petition is liable to be rejected on this ground itself, this Court is inclined to consider the merits also.