Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Sherli B vs State Of Kerala on 13 February, 2025

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

                                               2025:KER:12254




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 24TH MAGHA, 1946

                     WP(C) NO. 1639 OF 2025

PETITIONER:

         SHERLI B.
         AGED 55 YEARS, W/O.ANIRUDHAN,
         H.S.T. (HINDI) (UNDER SUSPENSION),
         M.K.L.M.H.S.S. KANNANALLOOR, KOLLAM
         RESIDING AT VASANTHALAYAM,
         KALLUVATHUKKAL P.O., KOLLAM,
         PIN - 691578.


         BY ADVS.
         B.MOHANLAL
         P.S.PREETHA
         ASWIN V. NAIR
         KARTHIK J SEKHAR
         ABIJITH M.
         AVANI NAIR
         JAYAPRABHA ARJUN
         PRAVEENA T.



RESPONDENTS:

    1    STATE OF KERALA
         REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO
         GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
         SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
 W.P.(C)No.1639 of 2025
                           :2:

                                            2025:KER:12254




    2    THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION
         GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, JAGATHY P.O.,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014.

    3    THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
         GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THEVALLY P.O.,
         KOLLAM, PIN - 691009.

    4    THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
         GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, CUTCHERY P.O.,
         KOLLAM, PIN - 691013.

    5    THE JOINT MANAGER
         M.K.L.M.H.S.S. KANNANALLOOR,
         KOLLAM, PIN - 691576.

    6    THE HEADMASTER
         M.K.L.M.H.S.S. KANNANALLOOR,
         KOLLAM, PIN - 691576.

         BY ADV.SMT. SONY K.V., GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 13.02.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C)No.1639 of 2025
                                     :3:

                                                         2025:KER:12254



                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 13th day of February, 2025 The petitioner is an approved HST (Hindi) working in the 6th respondent-School from 28.07.2000 onwards. The 4th respondent issued approval as per Order No:B4-403/2002/K.Dis. dated 18.11.2002. The probation of the petitioner was declared by the 5th respondent from 28.07.2001. The petitioner has got 24 years of service in the School and she is superannuating on 31.05.2025.

2. The 5th respondent issued Ext.P1 order of suspension to the petitioner along with memo of charges, suspending the petitioner from service on 06.09.2024. The 4 th respondent without complying with the proviso to Rule 67(8) Chapter XIV-A of the Kerala Education Rules, extended the period of Ext.P3 order of suspension as per Ext.P4 order. W.P.(C)No.1639 of 2025 :4:

2025:KER:12254 Admittedly, by Ext.P3 order, the 5 th respondent placed the petitioner under suspension on 06.09.2024. The 15 days period as provided under Rule 67(8) Chapter XIV-A of the Kerala Education Rules was over on 20.09.2024.

3. The 4th respondent came for physical verification and preliminary enquiry in the School on 27.09.2024, after expiry of the period as provided under Rule 67(8) Chapter XIV-A of the KER. The 4 th respondent then issued Ext.P4 order extending the period of suspension of the petitioner without fixing a time limit, despite the fact that the superannuation of the petitioner is on 31.05.2025, left with only about 4½ months. The application submitted by the petitioner before the 3rd respondent was forwarded to the 2nd respondent.

4. The petitioner submitted Ext.P5 application before the 2nd respondent to revoke the suspension and Exts.P3 and P4 orders. Ext.P4 order was issued by the 4 th respondent W.P.(C)No.1639 of 2025 :5: 2025:KER:12254 after expiry of 15 days period provided under Rule 67(8) Chapter XIV-A of the KER. The order is void ab initio in the eye of law. Ext.P3 order of suspension issued by the 5 th respondent, invoking the powers under Rule 67(7) Chapter XIVA of the KER is without the satisfaction of the existence of any public interest. Suspension order passed without recording satisfaction by the 5th respondent for keeping the petitioner under suspension, is not maintainable as held by the Division Bench of this Court in the judgment reported in Zamorin's Higher Secondary School v. District Educational Officer [2021 (4) KLT 260].

5. Going by Ext.P3, there is no whisper regarding the satisfaction of the existence of a public interest in the order. Ext.P4 order issued by the 4th respondent by arbitrary exercise of jurisdiction in violation of the provisions of Rule-67(8) Chapter XIV-A of the KER. Exts.P3 and P4 proceedings of respondents 4 and 5 are not having legal backing in the eye of law and it is W.P.(C)No.1639 of 2025 :6: 2025:KER:12254 liable to be set aside. The petitioner is entitled to get continuity of service in the post of HST (Hindi) in the 5 th respondent- School, contends the Counsel for the petitioner.

6. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 4.

7. The petitioner was suspended from service pending enquiry as per Ext.P3 order dated 06.09.2024. Ext.P3 contains a chargesheet also. Initially, the petitioner's suspension was confined to 15 days. However, subsequently, the said period was enlarged indefinitely as per Ext.P4 order dated 27.09.2024. Whether the enlargement of a suspension period can be for indefinite period is a question arising for consideration. However, taking into account the entire facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is to retire from service on superannuation on W.P.(C)No.1639 of 2025 :7: 2025:KER:12254 31.05.2025, I am of the view that in the interest of justice, the writ petition can be disposed of with appropriate directions.

8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the following directions:-

(i) The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner in service forthwith. This will be without prejudice to the enquiry proceedings that may be pending / initiated against the petitioner.
(ii) The enquiry proceedings, if any, shall be concluded within a period of four months.
(iii) The regularisation of the period of suspension of the petitioner shall depend upon the enquiry and further proceedings.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE ams W.P.(C)No.1639 of 2025 :8: 2025:KER:12254 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1639/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11/2003 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO:DEOKLM/1786/2023-A5 DATED 02/02/2024 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO:95/2024/JM DATED 06/09/2024 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO:B4/1750/2024 DATED 27/09/2024 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT REGARDING THE RECEIPT OF THE REPRESENTATION BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 10/10/2024 Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 07/01/2025 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AND ITS POSTAL RECEIPT