The court upheld the termination of a teacher for misconduct involving indecent behavior towards a minor, emphasizing that due process was satisfied through a preliminary inquiry per Article 81(B) of the KVS Code.

JUDGMENT :

A.S. SUPEHIA, J.

1. The present writ petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 09.12.2014 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (for short “the Tribunal”) in Original Application (OA) No.221 of 2011, whereby the Tribunal has rejected the OA filed by the petitioner challenging his termination order dated 15.07.2010 and the order dated 18.01.2011.

2. Serious allegations were levelled against the petitioner, who was serving as a Teacher, by a girl studying in Class VI-B of Kendriya Vidhyalaya, AFS, Vadodara (for short ”the KV”). The girl had made a complaint to her mother about the indecent behaviour of the writ petitioner and accordingly, an Inquiry Committee was constituted in view of the complaint registered by the mother of the girl student. The Inquiry Committee was constituted by the Assistant Commissioner vide order dated 27.02.2009 and the inquiry was conducted on 05.03.2009 and 03.04.2009 and the Committee submitted its report on 08.04.2009 to the Assistant Commissioner, who in turn submitted its report to KVS (Head Quarter) vide his Office Letter dated 28.04.2009.

3. Accordingly, since there were various shortcomings, the matter was remitted back on 07.08.2009 to the Assistant Commissioner for following the due procedure under the provisions of Article 81(B) of the Education Code for Kendriya Vidhyalaya Sangathan (for short “the Code for KVS”) and accordingly, a summary inquiry was ordered to be conducted vide letter dated 07.08.2009. Thereafter, the Preliminary Inquiry Committee was constituted by the order dated 15.09.2009 and the said Committee again conducted the inquiry on 16.09.2009 and concluded the same by submitting its report dated 16.09.2009 to the Principal. The Principal forwarded the Preliminary Inquiry Report dated 16.09.2009 along with relevant records to the Assistant Commissioner vide letter dated 16.09.2009, who in turn submitted the report to the KV’s Headquarters vide letter dated 18.09.2009.

4. It is found that during the inquiry, in which other preliminary school teachers were present, the Committee orally questioned the girl, after obtaining written statement from her mother. The petitioner participated in the inquiry and his statement was also recorded by the Committee. Accordingly, the Committee submitted its detailed report on 07.10.2009 to the respondent No.3 vide communication dated 09.10.2009, who in turn forwarded the report to the respondent No.2 by the letter dated 12.10.2009. The Committee confirmed in its report that the petitioner has committed misconduct involving himself in mild to moderate physical activities like touching the girl on her back side, hips, shoulders etc. and reported that the charges of immoral behaviour levelled against the petitioner were proved.

5. Pursuant to the aforesaid report, a show- cause notice was issued to the petitioner to submit his representation, as to why his services should not be terminated under Article 81(B) of the Code for KVS vide memorandum dated 26.04.2010. In response to this memorandum, the petitioner submitted his representation dated 06.05.2010. On perusal of the records submitted by the Inquiry Committee and the representation of the petitioner dated 06.05.2010, the Commissioner of KVS, by the order dated 15.07.2010 terminated the service of the petitioner, in exercise of power conferred upon the Disciplinary Authority under Article 81(B) of the Code for KVS. The order records that there is ample proof, which would indicate that the petitioner’s behaviour with the minor girl was improper and indecent.

6. Against the said order dated 15.07.2010 passed by the Commissioner of KVS, the petitioner presented the a