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 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

C.T.Maggy vs The State Of Kerala on 20 June, 2024

Author: Sathish Ninan

Bench: Sathish Ninan

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                          PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
 THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 30TH JYAISHTA, 1946
                  WP(C) NO. 29769 OF 2014
PETITIONER:

         C.T.MAGGY
         AGED 52 YEARS
         W/O.K.K.THOMAS,HEADEMISTRESS, V.R.A.M.M.HIGHER
         SECONDARY SCHOOL, THAIKKAD SOUTH, BRAHMAKULAM,
         THRISSUR-689 104.
         BY ADVS.
         SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED
         SRI.M.SAJJAD


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THE STATE OF KERALA
         REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
         GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
    2    THE DIRECTOR OF PULIC INSTRUCTIONS
         JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.
    3    THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
         THRISSUR AT AYYANTHOLE-680 003.
    4    THE DISTRICT EDUCATINAL OFFICER
         CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 506.
    5    THE MANAGER
         V.R.A.M.M.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, THAIKKAD
         SOUTH, BRAHMAKULAM, THRISSUR-689 104.
    6    C.B.BHAGEERATHAN
         AGED 50 YEARS
         S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, RESIDING AT CHOLAYIL HOUSE,
         NENMINI PO., THYCAUD, CHAVAKKAD THALUK, THRISSUR
         DISTRICT. ADDL.R6 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
         13/3/15 IN IA 3219/15
         BY ADVS.
         SRI.RAJIT
         SRI.V.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR
 WP(C) NO.29769 OF 2014
                                    -: 2 :-



OTHER PRESENT:

             SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN. SR. GP.


       THIS    WRIT      PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP    FOR
ADMISSION      ON    20.06.2024,    THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                        Sathish Ninan, J.
                    ----------------------
                    WP(C).No.29769 of 2014
               -------------------------------
            Dated this the 20th day of June, 2024

                                  JUDGMENT

Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P6 order of the District Educational Officer calling upon the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.39,823/-alleged to have been misappropriated by the petitioner, while in the service of V.R.Appu Master Memorial Higher Secondary School, Thaikkad South.

2. Petitioner was the Headmistress of the School since 01/06/1998. She retired from the service on 30/06/2018. In the year 2013, a Vigilance Enquiry was conducted. Ext.P1 is the report. The Vigilance and Anti- Corruption Bureau in Ext.P1 report recommended thus:

"PARA VIII RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The liability of Rs.39823.40/- was found during the investigation may be recouped from CT Maggi Headmistress of Appu Master Memorial School and -: 2 :- WP(C) NO.29769 OF 2014 stringent department action may be taken against her for non accounting of Noon Meal fund and PTA fund and further action of this case may be dropped."

3. Pursuant thereto, Ext.P3 Memo of charges were issued against the petitioner. Ext.P4 is the explanation submitted by the petitioner to the memo of charges. In Ext.P4 petitioner had pointed out that, a case was pending before the Court of Enquiry Commission and Special Judge, Thrissur and prayed that the enquiry may be deferred till its culmination. It is while so, the petitioner has been served with Ext.P6 notice.

4. I have heard Smt.P.A.Jenzia, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Bijoy Chandran, the learned Senior Government Pleader.

5. Undisputedly there had been no adjudication prior to the issuance of Ext.P6. Ext.P6 was issued only on the basis of Ext.P1 report. Though Rule 65(4)(iii)(a) of Chapter XIV A KER, provides for recovery from pay, of -: 3 :- WP(C) NO.29769 OF 2014 any pecuniary loss, that can only be pursuant to the disciplinary proceeding. In the present case, disciplinary proceedings have not culminated. Therefore, Ext.P6 is liable to be interfered with.

Resultantly, the writ petition is allowed. Ext.P6 order of the District Educational Officer is quashed. However, this shall be without prejudice to the rights of the authorities to proceed in accordance with law.

Sd/-

Sathish Ninan, Judge rsr -: 4 :- WP(C) NO.29769 OF 2014 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29769/2014 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXT.P1.TRUE COPY OF THE FACTUAL REPORT OF THE VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU DATED 30/8/2013.

EXT.P2.TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.B5- 10380/14 DATED 24/7/2014 OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR.

EXT.P3.TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES ISSUED BY THE MANAGER DATED 14/8/2014. EXT.P4.TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY OF THE PETITIONER DATED 14/10/2014.

EXT.P5.TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 17/3/2014. EXT.P5(A).TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P-5.

EXT.P6.TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER DATED 13/10/2014.

EXT.P6(A).TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P6.