A.RAVIKUMAR Vs. DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The charge memo, dated 09.07.2014, is sought to be quashed in the present writ petition.

(2.) The writ petitioner was appointed as B.T. Assistant in Mathematics on 27.08.1991, through the Teachers Recruitment Board. The writ petitioner states that on account of certain allegations, a charge memo was issued against him in proceedings, dated 09.07.2014. The charge against the writ petitioner is extracted hereunder:- ...[VARNACULAR TEXT UMITTED]...

(3.) The writ petition filed on merits cannot be considered, in the present writ petition. The explanations/objections with reference to the allegations set out in the charge memo cannot be adjudicated in a writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. All such issues disputed are to be adjudicated before the competent authority by producing documents and by adducing evidence. Under these circumstances, the grounds raised by the writ petitioner on merits, cannot be considered. This apart, the writ petitioner has to participate in the enquiry proceedings for the purpose of establishing his innocence. The authorities competent also must ensure that the disciplinary proceedings are concluded without causing any undue delay. Long pendency of the disciplinary proceedings would cause prejudice to the interest of the employees also. Thus, once the departmental disciplinary proceedings are initiated, the authorities must ensure that the said proceedings are concluded within a reasonable period of time.