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]

Karnataka High Court

Mrs Violet Mascarenhas W/O Mr William ... vs Nitk English Medium School Trust (Regd) on 22 March, 2013

Bench: K.L.Manjunath, Ravi Malimath

                         1




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE


         ON THE 22nd DAY OF MARCH 2013


                     PRESENT


    THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.L.MANJUNATH

                       AND

    THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH


       WRIT APPEAL NO.4065 OF 2012 (S-DE)


BETWEEN:

Mrs. Violet Mascarenhas,
W/o. Mr.William Mascarenhas,
Aged about 55 years,
Headmistress / Principal,
NITK English Medium High School,
Srinivasanagar,
Surathkal - 575 025
Dakshina Kannada District and
Residing at: 'Bonito Manor',
Surathkal - Bajpe Road,
Surathkal - 575 014,
D.K. District                 ...    APPELLANT

(By M/s.Subharao & Co. and
Mr.Narayana Bhat, Advocate)
                           2




AND:

  1.   NITK English Medium School
       Trust (Regd.)
       Represented by its Secretary,
       NITK Campus,
       Srinivasanagar,
       Surathkal - 575 025
       Dakshina Kannada District

  2.   The President,
       NITK English Medium School
       Trust (Regd.),
       NITK Campus,
       Srinivasanagar,
       Surathkal - 575 025
       Dakshina Kannada District

  3.   The Correspondent
       NITK English Medium School
       Trust (Regd.),
       NITK Campus,
       Srinivasanagar,
       Surathkal - 575 025
       Dakshina Kannada District

  4.   Dr.Sandeep Sancheti
       Director, i/c, NITK and
       President, NITK School Trust,
       Surathkal - 585 025

  5.   Dr.M. Govindaraj,
       Registrar of NITK and Correspondent
       Of NITK English Medium School Trust,
       NITK Campus, Srinivasanagar,
                        3




     Surathkal - 575 025
     Dakshina Kannada District

6.   Prof. A.O. Surendranathan,
     Secretary, NITK English
     Medium High School
     Trust (Regd.)
     NITK Campus,
     Srinivasanagar,
     Surathkal - 575 025
     Dakshina Kannada District

7.   Sri. Surapaiah Karnik,
     Father's name not known to the
     Petitioner,
     Residing at Door No.12-53/7,
     'Sumukha', Thadambail,
     Near Surathkal Telephone
     Exchange, Suratkal - 575 025

8.   Sri. Sunil Kumar,
     Principal,
     NITK English Medium High School
     Srinivasanagar,
     Surathkal - 575 025
     Dakshina Kannada District

9.   The National Institute of
     Technology Karnataka,
     Srinivasanagar,
     Surathkal - 575 025
     Dakshina Kannada District

                             ...    RESPONDENTS
                                  4




(By Sri.Nataraj Ballal and
Sri.Yashodar Shetty, Advocates
For M/s.Acara Law Chambers for C/R1)
                           *****

     This Writ Appeal filed under Section-4 of the
Karnataka High Court Act praying to set aside the order
passed in the Writ Petition No.6122/2012, dated
22.06.2012

     This Writ Appeal coming on for Orders this day,
K.L.Manjunath J., delivered the following:-

                          JUDGMENT

The only dispute in this appeal is as to - who is competent to issue the charge-sheet against the appellant? According to the appellant-Board , it directed the Director to issue the charge-sheet. But contrary to the directions of the Board, charge-sheet has been issued by the Secretary. Contending that the Secretary is competent to issue charge-sheet, writ petition was filed and the same has been rejected by the Learned Single Judge by an order dated 22.06.2012. Challenging the legality and correctness of the order of the Writ Petition 5 No.6122/2012, dated 22.06.2012, the present appeal is filed.

2. Having heard the counsel for the parties, we are of the view that no purpose would be served in entertaining this appeal. Because, whether the Secretary is competent to issue the charge-sheet or the Director, can be considered by the Disciplinary Authority at the time of considering the case on merits and in accordance with Law. If any action has to be initiated against the appellant, even if it is ultimately held that the Secretary was competent this point can be raised by the appellant before the appellate authority or before the competent authority. 6

3. With the above observations, the writ appeal is disposed off.

Sd/-

JUDGE Sd/-

JUDGE JJ