Karnataka High Court
Mrs Uma Hiremath W/O Air Commodore G L ... vs The Air Marshall on 19 September, 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.35589 OF 2012 (S-R)
BETWEEN:
1. MRS. UMA HIREMATH
W/O AIR COMMODORE G.L.HIREMATH
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
OCC: TEACHER
RESIDING AT NO.107/1,
SIDDHA NIVAS,
MANJUNATH LAYOUT,
IIND CROSS, GUNDAPPA ROAD
NAGASHETTIHALLI,
BANGALORE-560094.
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT. AKKAMAHADEVI HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE AIR MARSHALL
(AIR OFFICER-IN-CHARGE ADMINISTRATION)
AIR HEADQUARTERS,
VAYU BHAVAN,
NEW DELHI-110 011
2. SENIOR OFFICER-IN-CHARGE ADMINISTRATION
(APPELLAT AUTHORITY)
HQ TRAINING COMMAND,
J.C. NAGAR POST
BANGALORE-560006.
3. THE CHAIRMAN AND
AIR OFFICER-IN-CHARGE ADMINISTRATION,
INDIAN AIR FORCE EDUCATIONAL AND
2
CULTURAL SOCIETY
AIR HEAD QUARTERS,
NEW DELHI-110 066.
4. UNIT EDUCATION SECTION
HQ TC(U), AF
BANGALORE-560 006
BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
AIR FORCE SCHOOL, HEBBAL,
BANGALORE-560 006.
5. THE PRINCIPAL
AIR FORCE SCHOOL, HEBBAL,
BANGALORE-560 006.
6. THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE,
AIR FORCE SCHOOL, HEBBAL,
BANGALORE-560 006.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. GOWTHAMDEV C.ULLAL, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
DATED 9.4.2012 PASSED BY R2 VIDE ANNX-TI AND THE ORDER
DATED 22.12.11 PASSED BY THE R3 VIDE ANNX-T,
DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO REINSTATE THE PETITIONER AS
ASSISTANT TEACHER IN THE R3 SCHOOL FROM 22.12.2011
AND ETC.
THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR
ORDERS ON 17.09.2024, THIS DAY ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED
THEREIN, AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
3
C.A.V. ORDER
This case involves the petitioner who has served as a
Teacher at Air Force School, Hebbal, Bengaluru for 15 years
with a previously unblemished record. However, beginning
in April 2009, the school management initiated a series of
disciplinary proceedings against her, alleging a decline in
her performance and behaviour. These proceedings
culminated in the imposition of a severe penalty--
compulsory retirement. The petitioner challenges this
penalty, arguing that it is not only harsh and
disproportionate but also unjust, given the nature of the
allegations.
2. The petitioner asserts that she has been a
dedicated educator at Air Force School since 1994, earning
respect and recognition for her teaching abilities. However,
in April 2009, the management began issuing notices
against her, claiming that her performance had
deteriorated. The allegations include that a student under
her guidance failed the English subject, that she taught
4
while sitting on a chair, that she was inefficient in
controlling her class, and that she lacked proper planning
before entering the classroom. Further, it was claimed that
she resorted to dictating lessons and instructing students to
mark in their textbooks instead of engaging in more
interactive teaching methods. Additionally, the
management accused her of gossiping during an annual day
celebration and misinterpreted her constructive suggestions
for improving the school's educational standards as
criticisms against them. The culmination of these
allegations led to the management deciding to impose the
penalty of compulsory retirement on the petitioner.
3. The petitioner asserts that the allegations
brought against her are trivial and do not constitute serious
misconduct. She contends that the failure of one student in
English cannot be attributed solely to petitioner teaching
methods, particularly when her record over the years has
been exemplary. The petitioner also explains that her
practice of sitting while teaching was due to health reasons,
5
which she had communicated to the management.
Furthermore, she contends that the claims of inefficiency in
controlling the class are unsubstantiated, as there were no
prior complaints about her classroom management
throughout her tenure. The petitioner defends her teaching
methods, stating that dictating and having students mark
their textbooks is a legitimate pedagogical approach. She
also denies the accusation of gossiping during the annual
day celebration, emphasizing that it does not relate to her
professional responsibilities. Lastly, the petitioner argues
that her suggestions to improve educational standards were
intended to be constructive and should not have been
misinterpreted as attacks on the management.
4. The management, on the other hand, maintains
that the petitioner's performance has indeed declined since
April 2009, justifying their decision to impose a penalty.
They argue that the cumulative effect of the petitioner's
actions demonstrates negligence and inefficiency, which
they believe warrant a serious disciplinary response. The
6
management contends that the penalty of compulsory
retirement is appropriate and necessary to maintain the
school's standards and discipline.
5. Heard the counsel appearing for the petitioner
and learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the
impugned penalty of compulsory retirement inflicted by the
disciplinary authority and confirmed by the Appellate
authority.
6. Before I delve upon the penalty of dismissal of
service, this Court deems it relevant to extract some of the
legal notices sent by the Management and reply by the
petitioner:
" Tele: 23411061/4410
Unit Education Section
HQ TC (U), IAF
JC Nagar Post,
Bangalore-06
TCU/1319/1/ED-P File 25th July 08
Mrs Uma G Hiremath
TGT (English)
Air Force School Hebbal
Bangalore-06
7
SHOW CAUSE NOTICE
Madam,
1. On analysis of class X result it is noted with great
concern that there is downward trend in performance of
students in your subject (English). This year one student
got compartment in your subject ie English which is viewed
seriously by the Management Committee.
2. You are therefore hereby given an opportunity to show
cause as to why suitable corrective action should not be
initiated against you.
3. Your reply should reach to the undersigned by 07 Aug 08
else it will be understood that you have nothing to say in
your favour and ex-parte action will be initiated against
you.
Yours sincerely,
Sd,
(AKS Bishnoi)
Squadron Leader
Officer-in-charge AF
School Hebbal
Copy to: Principal Air Force School Hebbal
Personal File
ele: 23411061/4410"
Reply to Showcause Notice:
"1. Please refer TCU/1319/1/ED-P dated 25th July 2008
2. Before we come to the specific issue, I feel that there is
a need to clear the basics of 'Failure and it's 'Effects' in a
higher secondary school education system. When a
particular school is open for admissions from all categories,
of society and there is no stringent admission test, like that
of many reputed schools which boast about very good
results, we must have some scope for a percentage of
children not doing well or failing in their exams. The school
8
and the teacher should provide suitable learning
environment and actively facilitate the learning process.
The performance of a student in examination is subject to
various factors, some of them could be very personal and
beyond anybody's control, including that of the child or
parent.
3. 'Fear of Failure' is a major psychological factor which
affects everybody in life. This is very evident in
schoolchildren particularly so when preparing for the board
exams. This stress could result in psychosomatic illness or
even total nervous breakdown which may have
catastrophic effect on the child and entire family. Under
these circumstances there is a need to gracefully accept
the failure and encourage the student and the teacher to
recover from the shock and do better in the very next
opportunity. A post mortem of the failure will put stress on
the teacher and student which may result in teachers
putting undue pressure on children and children reaching
breaking point which will defeat the very purpose of post
mortem efforts which are conducted on living/growing
human beings. This kind of notices and enquiries done by
way of open letters not even put in an envelope or
confidential marking embarrass the teacher and the
student in their respective communities. Administration
may note that adolescent girls are extremely sensitive to
such embarrassment. I hope this exercise is some local
thinking and not on instruction from higher office. Even If
there are any such instructions, there is a need to take up
the matter in the Interest of wellbeing of student
particularly when students of different backgrounds
(children of class I to class IV officers) are studying
together in one class as a group.
4. Now coming to the specific case of Miss Sahana
Katimani, the student was suffering from thyroid
malfunction and anemia and admitted as an 'Inpatient' and
treated at M.S Ramaiah hospital just prior to exams
(hospital certificate attached). The girl and the parents
themselves were not keen to undergo exams. However
school administration advised and encouraged them to
appear for exams as there were some remote chances that
she may pass or at the least she will have a live experience
of going through the board exams. So, everyone including
the school and the parents were aware that she is not likely
9
to pass (letter from parents is attached as appendix -B).
Then why is this sudden concern about this failure?
Reason could be two:
a) School management is not aware of the background of
the case and issued a showcause notice without thinking of
its implication or even consulting the principal who
supervises the day to day affairs of the school and
examinations.
b) A sinister plan to harass me knowing I am staying alone
at Bangalore without my husband. In the past also many
efforts were made to show break in service when I applied
for medical leave with requisite certificates. Showing me as
reemployed, fixing my pay scale and seniority at own will
and not giving any credit or allowing me to avail the
accumulated leave which was (is still) due to me."
Advisory Note sent by Air Force School, Hebbal
"Advisory Note
APSH/02/08 Date 6 Oct-2008
Tel-23411061/4505
To,
Mrs Uma Hiremath
FOT, AFSH
Madam,
1) Your class has been observed by O ilc AFSH, i/c Principal
Ms Vyjayanthimala and Principal on 08/09/08 and
23/09/08
2) Following observations were communicated to you and
counseled
i) Not to sit in the chair while teaching
ii) Not to be distracted by one or two problem
students
10
iii) Poetry should be explained stanza wise so that
the entire context of the verse is understood. Mere
reading out of the Poem without explanation is not
sufficient
iv) Class control to be improved
v) Class to be more interactive
3) You are advised to improve upon these points within a
period of one month
Thanking You,
Sd/-
(MK Lakshmi)
Principal
AF School Hebbal
Copy- O i/c AFSH"
Reply to Advisory Note
"3. Incorrect Observation: The note states that I was
sitting in the class which is totally Incorrect, I never sit in
the class and even on that day I was not sitting in the class
While teaching. By the by what does the school code say
about a teacher sitting in the class? If it is prohibited, is
this information circulated? Also, why keep a chair in the
classroom if the teachers are not to sit in the class? Though
I do not sit in the class, I still suggest that the school
should not act hastily in removing the chair as a Knee jerk
reaction. It would be worth seeing the age, physical state
and allotment of continuous classes to the teacher. If the
teacher is expected to stand all the while in the class there
should be proper planning while making the time table. No
teacher should be given two classes continuously. In the
present practice of giving four to five (even more) classes
may come in the purview of physical torture to the teacher
and school can be held responsible for the consequences
like teacher fainting, falling sick or long term physical
deformity and seek compensation from those who enforce
such restriction.
11
4. Mischievous and Motivated: What are the criteria for
these observations? What is the classroom teaching
experience of those who are making these observations?
Taking classes for military recruits cannot be compared to
the teaching of school children. One may stand and even
make the trainees also stand all through the class with a
different justification all together in military classes.
5. What should be the criteria for observation? Those who
are employed recently need to be observed rather than
those who have spent decades in the same school. I have
been teaching in the A.F School for the last 20 years and in
this same school for the last 14 years. Probably these
observations are done with the motive of harassing specific
teachers who gave a reply to these uncalled for showcause
notice for which the school is not even bothered to give a
reply even after months - probably they have no answers.
Point to be noted is, only those three teachers have been
given the advisory notes.
6. It is mischievous on the part of the school to observe
the class on only one day and show it as two different
days. Also do not communicate anything after the
observation and weeks later send a note stating these
points were brought out and the teachers were counseled.
Either there is a total mixup or it is done with ulterior
motive. Why not keep the system totally open and
transparent? Why not keep a record of who is being
observed and for what? Maintain a register for observation,
make entry then and there and get teachers remark as well
as signature. It will prove who all are being observed and
these observations will be of value to other teachers also,
to improve without being observed. Why make it subjective
as observation by one or two individuals? Why not have a
observation committee? Why spring surprises by making
observation out of the hat? Why not make a study,
laydown the codes for conduct in classroom and then
observe? Even better, why not take demonstration classes
where all other teachers can observe and LEARN? If the
present observers can take classes and teach live students
for continuously 4-5 classes it would be a great motivator,
for all the teachers and a practical example of "practicing
what one is capable of preaching.
7. xxx
12
8. xxx
9. xxx
10. xxx
11. xxx
12. A Few Words For The Good Of The School: If you want
to improve the school make it more objective, transparent
and create a positive environment rather than spoiling it.
The standards in the school are really sliding down.
The teachers are kept busy with such "uneducational
activities. Work load is not given evenly. Some teachers do
not take classes, instead they just gossip in the School -
NO classes, NO observation, NO mistake. A good example
of a model teacher. Please make it a point to observe the
classes of these newly appointed, kith and kin of those in
the management chain and if possible give a chance to the
senior teacher to observe them. In one sentence "be
honest and good to the school". If you want to change the
system formulate the new policies, circulate them, and
obtain comments from those who have to implement them
on ground. Purify/refine the rules and then make
observation which would be acceptable by the teachers and
will be fair in the eyes of the law. "
Advisory Note sent by Air Force School, Hebbal
" Advisory Note
AFSH/02/08
Date: 24 oct.2008
23411061/4506
To,
Uma Hiremath
TGT, AFSH
Madam,
1. It is intimated that during visit by OIC AFS Hebbal in
assembly and during conduct of aerobic exercise for Annual
13
Sports Day Celebration you were found discussing to group
of teachers which is highly irregular despite verbal advice
and circulars.
2. This is noted with great concern by the OIC AFS Hebbal.
You are hereby advised not to discuss during assembly
time and correct the students by monitoring their activities
for which you are responsible. Any matter which requires
deliberation can be discussed in staff room or after school
hours.
Thanking You,
Sd/-
(MK Lakshmi)
Principal
AF School-Hebbal
Copy- O I/c AFSH "
Reply to advisory Note
"3. Apart from being an incorrect observation it is devoid of
merit on the following grounds.
a. If at all I was discussing some thing, I could not
have been discussing with my self. Who are the
other teachers engaged in discussion with me?
b. There should be at least two or more names
(Teachers). What is the action taken on them?
c. The same observation is made on the same three
teachers who were issued with advisory note earlier
in the past. All the three of us belong to different
Houses and stand in different groups. If all the three
of us were found talking to other teachers, there are
at least Half a dozen more teachers who were talking
but know action is initiated on the, which
indicates/Proves very clear discrimination and
victimization
.
d. Also it may please be informed who had observed
this point and from what location? In the entire
school assembly with all the children and teachers if
14
some one is constantly following few teachers only,
the intensions are questionable and can have any
type of repercussions to mention that safety and
protection of the honor of the school students as well
as employees within the school complex including
the school outdoor activities is the responsibility of
school administration.
4. Though I have not got any replies to my letters in the
past, I am very optimistic that one day I will get the replies
each of my letters. Thank you for giving me some more
documentary proof to make my case stronger. "
Management's reaction to reply by the petitioner and
issuance of warning notice.
Confidential
"3. However, it was observed that in your letters to the
subject advisory notes, you have resorted to uncalled for
allegations, and also disputed the shortcoming brought out
in your teaching methods as observed on 08 Sep 08 and 23
Sep 08. It is noted with great concern that in your reply,
you have used intemperate language such as, "Advisory
note incorrect, mischievous and motivated and hence
outright rejected summarily, purview of physical torture to
the teacher, seek compensation from those who enforce
such restriction, motive of harassing specific teachers,
observations are very subjective (motivated), as
harassment by a particular person, personal doubtful
motive, I can certainly use it to my advantage, without any
truth or substance in it etc". You have also alleged that
your class was observed on only one day and shown it as
two different days." which is wrong as the undersigned,
Principal and officiating Principal observed your classes on
two different dates viz on 08 Sep 08. and 23 Sep 08. You
have also given some suggestions but with derogatory
remarks/tone. Any good suggestions for betterment of
teaching will be taken positively and considered for
implementation.
15
4. You are hereby warned to desist from such acts of using
intemperate language and unprofessional behaviour. Such
act of yours in future would be viewed seriously and
appropriate action as deemed fit will be initiated against
you."
Warning letter issued by the Management
"Tele: 23411061/4410
U Edn Sec
HQ TC (U), AF
Bangalore-06
TCU/1321/1/3/ED 18 Aug 09
Mrs Uma Hiramath
TGT
Air Force School Hebbal
WARNING LETTER
Madam,
1. It is intimated that during the routine check on 17 Aug
09 at 1350 hrs by Mrs Kiran Trivedi Officiating Principal and
JWO D Bhardwaj, JWO IC AFS Hebbal following points were
observed:
(a) The lesson plan was made for different chapter
but during the check it was found that you were
teaching the chapter, 'Ruling the Country side'
(History). This clearly shows that no proper planning
was done before going to the class.
(b) Class control was very poor.
(c) You were found dictating the answers to the
students by telling them to mark a portion of
paragraphs in the text book. Few students who were
not having the text books were found sitting ideal.
No effort was made to ask the students to sit with
fellow students or share the books. The students
were not able to locate the answer as told by the
16
teacher and the teacher was found going from one
student to another.
(d) There was a total chaos in the class room which
is against the norms of teaching profession.
2. You are hereby once again "WARNED" to be more
proactive in class room teaching learning process. In case
no improvement is shown in future appropriate action as
deemed fit will be initiated against you.
(AKS Bishnoi)
Sqn Ldr
O IC AFS Hebbal
Copy to: Principal AFS Hebbal "
Reply to warning Letter
"From
Mrs Uma G Hiremath
TGT AFS Hebbal
Date: 21 Aug 2009
To,
Officer in Charge
Air Force School Hebbal
Bangalore
SUB: REPLY TO WARNING LETTER
(Through proper channel)
1. Reference is made to letter no. TCU/1321/1/3/ED Dated
18th August 2009.
2. The following clarifications are given to the observations
made Vide above quoted letter.
a) It was originally planned to conduct the class as
per the lesson plan however when some children
wanted me to cover the previous lesson which they
missed due to their participation in cultural activities
planned on 15th August, I had to cover the previous
lesson for those children to keep them at par with
others who had already attended the class on 14th
17
August. This was required to ensure that some
children does not lose, so I had to cover the topic
and question/ answers for the same. This was not an
observation by the visitors, instead immediately on
their entry I informed them about the change in the
topic and continued the same with the permission of
the visiting team. Later continued with the actual
lesson plan also.
b) Some of the children who were not doing anything
were those who had already attended the class on
14th August. The general level of understanding of
the class is quite low. This class was given to me in
the recent change of time table. It may please be
noted that change of time table and subject in the
middle of the session disturbs the rhythm of class
room teaching and learning process.
c) As stated above the intelligence level of class is
quite low and it takes special efforts to make them
understand. Some of them are unable to find the
correct page and correct paragraph quickly. To avoid
wastage of precious time of other children teacher
had to personally go to each child and get the
correct marking. This can be interpreted as an extra
involvement and personal concern of the teacher if it
is seen in appositive manner.
d) There was no chaos in the class till such time the
visitors entered. Instead of merely observing, the
visiting team started talking to the children
personally known to them, some of the other
children also got distracted and started diverting
their attention that side.
3. I am quite surprised to receive a warning letter for
being extra helpful to the children, that too without giving
me an opportunity to explain. It is not out of place to
mention here that the facts are twisted and reported to the
administration repeatedly. Even when this letter was given
I was verbally told not to reply. On the similar lines
attempts were made to wrongly represent my case as non
cooperative when salaries were revised recently and on
many other occasions, for which I have proof in writing to
prove my case as an when required. Whenever I found
them doing such things and pointed out these things they
18
have no answer, they just keep quiet and discourage the
teacher from reporting these matters. I have been teaching
in various Air Force schools for more than 20 years and 15
years in this school alone. There was no occasion when I
was observed for any short comings. The recent and
repeated observations and communications in the last few
months indicate that there could be a different motive. This
may please be looked into to avoid unnecessary
embarrassment to a senior teacher."
Warning letter sent by Air Force School, Hebbal
" AIR FORCE SCHOOL
BANGALORE-560006
CONFIDENTIAL
AFSH 02 09 25 AUG 09
WARNING
To,
Mrs Uma G Hiremath
TGT (English)
Air Force School Hebbal
Bangalore-06
Madam,
1. On 24 Aug 09, you were asked to acknowledge the
observation of correction work in English of Class VIII A.
2. After reading you argued and refused to sign, and asked
for a Xerox copy of the observation, which is not the
Practise.
3. you are hereby "WARNED" for showing disrespect to the
constituted authority by raising your voice and refusal to
sign as per Education Code 2005 chapter 7 para 3 (a)(w).
Sd/-
(M K Lakshmi)
Principal
19
AF School Hebbal
Copy to Oic AFSH"
Reply to warning letter
"From:
Mrs Uma G Hiremath
TGT AFS Hebbal
To: Date: 26 Aug 2009
Principal
Air Force School Hebbal
Bangalore
SUB: REPLY TO WARNING LETTER
1. Reference is made to your letter no. AFSH/02/09 Dated
25th August 2009.
2. I have the following facts to state in response to the
observations.
a) On 24th Aug 09 I was asked to sign for the
observations made on the 'correction work' in
English subject for class VIII-A for which I am not
responsible as the time table had been changed and
for the last more than two months I have handed
over class VIII - A English and taken over VII-A&B
English. When I was trying to explain that I am not
responsible for this as it was clarified at the time of
change of time table that hence forth I would be
responsible for the new class and have nothing to do
with the old one, you started shouting at me and
insisted I must sign on the letter without properly
reading it. For which I said I will carefully read it,
understand and note down in my book if required as
there is no copy of such communication given to us.
At this point it was you who started shouting without
any regard for the long service of the teacher. Since
it was pack up time and I did not want to argue with
you, I told I will read and sign it tomorrow and went
off to bring this matter to the notice of the officer in
charge in his office.
20
b) I never asked for a photocopy, I merely said I
need time to go through properly and note down the
contents in my diary as no copy is given. It may be
noted that all such unpleasant communications are
handed over at the pack up time and asked to sign/
acknowledge in a hurry. Having suffered after blindly
signing earlier. I wanted to be more careful this
time.
c) Entire observation is incorrect neither I raised the
voice nor argued. Instead I said that I will go
through properly and then sign it. By nature I never
shout on anybody.
3. The repeated counseling and warnings without any valid
cause, without giving opportunity to explain indicate that
intent could be something different. Being a senior officer's
wife and associated with Air Force for more than thirty
years, I do not want to initiate any proceedings or
intervention by any agency against the organization which I
consider my own. However I feel I am being drawn to do
certain things against my will. Such impulsive warning
letters without adequate time given to react/explain can be
challenged at higher levels of Air Force organization or
court of law. I have enough circumstantial evidence and
witnesses to prove my case if required. I once again
request you to be reasonable to the cause of education and
dignified in dealing with a senior teacher.
Sd/-
Uma G. Hiremath
Copy To:
O i/c AFSH: This refers to my interview with you in your
office on 24th Aug 09. As expected very next this letter has
been given to me. I request you to intervene and set
aside/cancel this warning letter. Matter may please be
examined and comments/remarks made in the school
documents without my knowledge, if any may please be
expunged."
21
7. Upon reviewing the facts, this Court observes
that the petitioner had a long history of dedicated service
with no prior allegations of misconduct. The petitioner's
experience certificates from both the Delhi Army School and
Bidar unequivocally affirm her status as a dedicated and
sincere educator. Over the years, she has been recognized
for her unwavering commitment to her students and her
profession. These certificates are a testament to her
exemplary teaching methods, her ability to inspire students,
and her professional integrity. Her long-standing positive
reputation in these institutions is indicative of her
consistent performance and dedication, which makes the
allegations levelled against her by the current management
seem all the more questionable.
8. The records from Air Force School present a
starkly different narrative, where the petitioner found
herself suddenly unexpectedly under intense scrutiny.
Within the span of a single year, she received eight notices
from the management, alleging a range of deficiencies in
22
her performance. Such a rapid and concentrated barrage of
accusations, particularly against someone with a previously
unblemished record, raises serious concerns about the true
motivations behind these actions. The timing and frequency
of these notices suggest that the petitioner was being
unfairly singled out, rather than being evaluated in a fair
and objective manner.
9. The explanations offered by the petitioner in
response to these notices paint a narrative that is in direct
contrast to the one suggested by the management. Her
responses were well-reasoned, and she provided context
and clarification that should have alleviated any concerns if
the management had been acting in good faith. Instead,
the persistent issuance of notices, despite her explanations,
indicates a deliberate attempt to create a negative paper
trail. This suggests that the management may have had
ulterior motives for targeting her, which remain
undisclosed. The contrast between her past commendations
and the current allegations strongly implies that the
23
petitioner was being targeted unjustly with the
management perhaps seeking to push her out for reasons
unrelated to her professional capabilities or conduct.
10. This Court finds that the allegations made
against the petitioner, even if taken at face value, are
relatively minor infractions. Such allegations typically do
not warrant severe disciplinary action, especially when the
alleged misconduct has not been shown to have a
significant negative impact on the students' learning or the
school's overall functioning. The principle of proportionality
in disciplinary matters dictates that the punishment should
be commensurate with the severity of the offense. In this
case, the penalty of compulsory retirement is deemed to be
disproportionately harsh given the nature of the alleged
misconduct. This Court also notes that the petitioner's
suggestions for improving educational standards should
have been considered in good faith by the management,
rather than being misconstrued as criticisms.
24
11. In examining the arbitrary actions taken by the
management against petitioner, it is imperative to highlight
the necessity of judicial review to uphold fairness and
prevent misuse of authority. The Supreme Court of India
has consistently upheld the principle that administrative
actions must be conducted with adherence to the principles
of natural justice and fairness.
12. In L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India1, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court emphasized that judicial review is a
fundamental feature of the Constitution, essential for
maintaining the rule of law. This Court holds that any action
by administrative authorities must be subject to judicial
scrutiny to ensure that it does not transgress the
boundaries of legality and reasonableness. This principle
underscores the need for judicial review in petitioner's case,
where the management's repeated actions appear arbitrary
and lack a fair basis.
1
(1997) 3 SCC 261
25
13. Furthermore, in Ranjit Thakur v. Union of
India2, the Hon'ble Supreme Court clarified that decisions
by administrative authorities should be based on objective
criteria and should not be arbitrary or capricious. The Court
highlighted that administrative actions that are
unreasonable or lack rational justification can be invalidated
through judicial review. Petitioner's experience,
characterized by inconsistent observations and unjustified
warnings, reflects a lack of objective basis in the
management's decisions, reinforcing the need for judicial
oversight.
14. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in B.C. Chaturvedi
vs. Union of India3 also affirmed that the principles of
natural justice and procedural fairness must be followed by
administrative authorities. The Court held that decisions
affecting the rights of individuals must be made with proper
consideration of all relevant factors and with a fair
opportunity for the affected party to present their case. The
2
(1987) 4 SCC 611
3
(1995) 6 SCC 750
26
management's actions against petitioner, including issuing
warnings without proper explanation or opportunity for
defense, violate these principles of natural justice.
15. In State of Kerala v. A. Lakshmikutty4 , the
Hon'ble Supreme Court further reiterated that judicial
review is necessary to prevent administrative actions that
are motivated by bias or are in violation of established
procedures. The repeated, seemingly baseless warnings
and advisory notes against petitioner suggest a pattern that
may be influenced by personal biases rather than objective
performance assessment.
16. Given these precedents, it is clear that judicial
review is crucial in petitioner case to ensure that the actions
of the management are scrutinized for adherence to
principles of legality, fairness, and reasonableness. The
Supreme Court's judgments collectively support the view
that administrative actions must be transparent, objective,
and justifiable, making judicial oversight essential to rectify
4
(1987) 1 SCC 439
27
potential abuses of power and uphold the integrity of
administrative processes.
17. Based on the above analysis, this Court
concludes that the penalty of compulsory retirement
imposed on the petitioner is unjust, harsh, and
disproportionate. The management's decision lacks
adequate justification, given the trivial nature of the
allegations.
18. In view of the above findings, the Court
concludes that the penalty of compulsory retirement
imposed on the petitioner is harsh, disproportionate, and
unjust and, the management's decision is therefore set
aside.
19. For the reasons stated supra, this Court
proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed;
28(ii) The impugned order of penalty of compulsory retirement dated 22.12.2011 passed by the respondent No.3 vide Annexure-T and the order dated 09.04.2012 passed by the respondent No.2 vide Annexure-T1 are hereby quashed;
(iii) The fact that petitioner has superannuated, the management is directed to expunge all adverse remarks relating to the allegations from the petitioner's service record;
(iv) Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of.
SD/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA