Kerala High Court
Vaishnav Vijay vs State Of Kerala on 27 May, 2025
Author: D. K. Singh
Bench: D. K. Singh
2025:KER:36567
WP(C) NO. 14684 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. K. SINGH
TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MAY 2025 / 6TH JYAISHTA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 14684 OF 2025
PETITIONER/S:
VAISHNAV VIJAY
AGED 24 YEARS
S/O. C. RANI, VAISHNAVAM, KAITHAKUZHI, KONDANKARA, CHENKAL
P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, (WORKING AS ASSISTANT, KANNUR
UNIVERSITY, THAVAKKARA, CIVIL STATION P.O., KANNUR )., PIN
- 695132
BY ADVS.
ARAVINDA KUMAR BABU T.K.
FARAH JYOTHI PRADEEP
GAUTHAM SURESH
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HOME (SSB)
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.,
PIN - 695001
2 THE KANNUR UNIVERSITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, THAVAKKARA, CIVIL STATION
P.O., KANNUR ., PIN - 670002
3 THE REGISTRAR
THE KANNUR UNIVERSITY, THAVAKKARA, CIVIL STATION P.O.,
KANNUR., PIN - 670002
GP SRI. V VENUGOPAL
2025:KER:36567
WP(C) NO. 14684 OF 2025
2
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.05.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:36567
WP(C) NO. 14684 OF 2025
3
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is working as an Assistant under the 02nd respondent University, has approached this Court in the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, impugning the order dated 23.07.2024 in Ext.P5, whereby the State Government has directed the University to terminate the services of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was involved in an offence registered against him under Section 153 of IPC and under Section 120(o) of KP Act, for which an FIR No. 906/2022 came to be registered against him. However, the said case was closed and had been compounded before the Judicial First-Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur vide the order dated 11.02.2023 on payment of a fine of Rs. 500/- under Section 153 IPC and a fine of Rs. 1500/- under Section 120(o) of the KP Act.
2. The petitioner applied for the said post of an Assistant in the University in the year 2024, and he did not disclose in the application form that he was involved in a petty offence which was closed in the year 2023. The petitioner was selected and appointed 2025:KER:36567 WP(C) NO. 14684 OF 2025 4 as an Assistant after the KPSC made the selection. The petitioner has been working as an Assistant under the 02nd respondent University w.e.f 29.07.2024.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the nature of the offence in which the petitioner was involved is petty, which is evident from the order passed by the learned Magistrate in Ext.P4, inasmuch as the offence got compounded on payment of compounding fee / fine of Rs.2000/-. The alleged ground for terminating the services of the petitioner is that he did not disclose his involvement in the offence is wholly unjustified, and the petitioner had made sufficient disclosure in the application. Even otherwise, looking at the nature of the offence, the said facts should not be taken into consideration for dispensing the service of the petitioner.
4.The learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied on the said judgment of this court in Harilal S vs. Union of India [ 2025 KHC OnLine 112] passed by this court after considering a few judgments of the Supreme Court, including RamKumar v. State of Uttarpradesh [2011(14) SCC 709] and Ravindra Kumar v. State of 2025:KER:36567 WP(C) NO. 14684 OF 2025 5 U.P (2024 (5) SCC 264).
5. The nature of the offence in which the petitioner was involved and was compounded way back in the year 2023 is not such that it can be said that the petitioner's moral turpitude was in question. The offence was neither heinous nor very serious in nature. Respectfully following the Supreme Court in the aforesaid two judgments and the judgment of this court in Harilal S (supra), I am of the considered view that the impugned order in Ext.P5 whereby the University has been directed to dispense with the services of the petitioner on the ground of non-disclosure of the petty offence is wholly unjustified, arbitrary and illegal and against the dictum of the judicial pronouncements mentioned above.
Thus, the present writ petition is allowed, the impugned order in Ext.P5 is set aside, without cost.
Sd/-
D. K. SINGH JUDGE SJ 2025:KER:36567 WP(C) NO. 14684 OF 2025 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14684/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 23.07.2024 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 16.01.2025 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 906 OF 2022 OF PAYYANNUR POLICE STATION IN C.C 157/2023 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN C.C 157/2023 OF THE LEARNED JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PAYYANNUR DATED 11.02.2023 Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(RT) 1067/2025/HOME DATED 28.03.2025 Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE MERCY PETITION FILED BY THE MOTHER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 05.04.2025