High Court of Kerala
Case Law Search
C.M. PHILIP v. STATE OF KERALA - WP(C) No. 15004 of 2007(J)  RD-KL 11232 (26 June 2007)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMWP(C) No. 15004 of 2007(J)
1. C.M. PHILIP,
1. STATE OF KERALA,
2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
3. THE DY. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
5. THE DISTRICT PROJECT OFFICER,
6. THE CORPORATE MANAGER,
For Petitioner :SRI.MVS.NAMBOOTHIRY
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
O R D E R
A.K. BASHEER, J.W.P.(C). NO. 15004 OF 2007
Dated this the 26th day of June, 2007
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner, who was working as Headmaster in the school under the management of respondent No.6, suffered an order of suspension because of his careless handling of question papers for the S.S.L.C. Examination held in March 2007.
2. It appears that petitioner had opened a bundle of question papers on a day prior to the actual date of holding such examination. It is on record that petitioner was served with Ext.P9 notice issued by the Deputy Director of Education directing him to show cause why a sum of Rs. 64,026/- shall not be recovered from him, that being the amount spent by the Department as additional expense for conduct of the examination for the subject in question. Thereafter Ext.P13 communication was issued by the Deputy Director of Education directing the Manager to recover the amount from the petitioner or in the alternative to obtain an undertaking from him that he was agreeable to deduct the above sum from his retiral benefits. It was further informed that disciplinary action against the petitioner would WPC NO.15004/07 Page numbers be dropped only if he made good the loss sustained by the Government.
3. It is on record that petitioner was reinstated in service on the eve of his superannuation and he has retired from service.
4. Anyhow, I do not propose to go into the other details of the issue at this stage, in view of the submission made by the learned counsel at the Bar. He submits that petitioner is prepared to pursue the remedy available to him against the order of recovery. In the above facts and circumstances, the writ petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to the remedies available to him under law as against Exts.P4, P9 & P13. It is made clear that I have not considered the merit of the contentions raised by the petitioner in this regard. If the petitioner prefers a revision petition before the Competent authority against Ext.P13 within a month from today, the same shall be entertained and an appropriate decision thereon shall be taken, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within three months from the dare of receipt thereof after affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to be heard.
A.K. BASHEER, JUDGEvps WPC NO.15004/07 Page numbers
A.K. BASHEER, JUDGEOP NO.20954/00 WPC NO.15004/07 Page numbers
1ST MARCH, 2007
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.