SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Mad) 1317

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
T.S. SIVAGNANAM & P. VELMURUGAN, JJ.
S. Arockiam – Appellant
Versus
District Elementary Educational Officer, Ramanathapuram – Respondent
W.A. (MD) No. 1206 of 2015, 628 of 2017 in C.M.P. (MD) No. 5221 of 2017
Decided On : 19-06-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. V. Panneerselvam.
For the Respondents: Mr. V.R. Shanmuganathan, Mr. Isaac Mohanlal and Mr. T. Cibi Chakraborthy.

Headnote:

Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 – Section 82 – Tamil Nadu Recognized Private Schools (Regulation) Rules, 1974 – Rule 16 – Allegation – Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies – Service – Appeals by the writ petitioner as well as the Management are directed against order was filed to quash order of Correspondent, R.C. Middle School/third respondent which appellant who was working as a Secondary Grade Teacher charge proceedings, which were initiated against the appellant pertain to certain events, which had taken place when he was discharging his duties as a Part-Time Clerk in a Co-operative Society called as – Teachers Thrift & Credit Society which post he was appointed by Management order of dismissal from service did not pertain to any allegation in discharge of appellants duties as a Secondary Grade Teacher – Held, Enquiry Officer failed to afford sufficient opportunity to appellant and Enquiry Officer could not have commenced enquiry proceedings on the said date as there has not been full and effective compliance of Court order directing payment of arrears of salary inherent defect goes to root of matter vitiating the entire proceedings as well as ultimate order of dismissal no hesitation to hold that entire domestic enquiry was vitiated and consequently order of dismissal from service passed against the appellant deserves to be set aside – Management cannot take a stand that appellant was adopting dilatory tactics rather who wanted to somehow complete the enquiry, despite fact that appellant submitted representations to Management requesting for full compliance of the Court order – Management cannot rely upon decision in case of facts in said case were entirely different – Writ appeal is allowed.

JUDGMENT :

T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.

1. These appeals by the writ petitioner as well as the Management are directed against the order, dated 02.07.2015, made in W.P. (MD) No. 165 of 2008, which was filed to quash the order of the Correspondent, R.C. Middle School/third respondent in W.A. (MD) No. 1206 of 2015, dated 20.12.2007, by which the appellant, who was working as a Secondary Grade Teacher in R.C. Middle School, Melakavanoor, Paramakudi Taluk, was dismissed from service. In this Judgment, the writ petitioner shall be referred as "the appellant" and the appellant - School shall be referred as "the Management."

2. The charge proceedings, which were initiated against the appellant pertain to certain events, which had taken place when he was discharging his duties as a Part-Time Clerk in a Co-operative Society called as - Alankaramadha Teachers Thrift & Credit Society Ltd. Paramakudi, to which post he was appointed by the Management. In other words, the order of dismissal from service did not pertain to any allegation in the discharge of the appellant's duties as a Secondary Grade Teacher.

3. The facts, which are necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as hereunder:

3.1. The appellant was appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher in R.C. Yadava Middle School, Melakavanoor, Paramakudi Taluk, on 18.12.1992. By a resolution, dated 02.02.1993, passed by N.N. 509, Alankaramadha Teachers Thrift & Credit Society Ltd., (hereinafter, it may be referred to as "the Society"), the appellant was appointed as a Part-Time Clerk in the said Society. The said Society was formed by the Teachers working in various Private Aided Schools including R.C. Management Schools, which fell under the Corporate Management of R.C. Diocease. In or about July, 1999, the appellant came to know that the Correspondent of the School had issued Pay Certificates to eleven Teachers, who were ineligible to transact any business with the said Society and therefore, he addressed a letter, dated 28.07.1999, to the President of the Society bringing to his notice the said fact. Subsequently, since there was a change of President in the Society, a similar letter was sent by the appellant, on 10.09.1999, to the new President.

3.2. Subsequently, since Pay Certificates were issued to eight other Teachers, who were also ineligible and by then a Special Officer had taken over the Society, the appellant, sent a letter dated 23.07.2001, to the Special Officer bringing to his notice that the Correspondent of the School had issued Pay Certificates for eight ineligible persons. The ineligibility was on account of the fact that those Teachers to whom Pay Certificates were issued by the Correspondent were not employed in the Private Aided Schools or the R.C. Management Schools under the Corporate Management of the R.C. Diocease.

3.3. As the term of Office of the President of the Society was over and a Special Officer was appointed, the appellant addressed a letter to the Special Officer, dated 12.09.2002, stating that the Correspondent has issued Pay Certificates to five other ineligible persons. It appears that the Correspondent of the School addressed the Special Officer, by letter dated 15.09.2002, that there were instances in the past, where Pay Certificates were issued to the Teachers working under the Corporate Management and based on those Pay Certificates, they have obtained loan from the Society and following the same, he had issued Pay Certificates to the Teachers and requested the Special Officer to sanction loan to the five ineligible persons on an assurance that they will repay the amount without default.

3.4. The appellant being unable to continue further as a Part-Time Clerk resigned from the said post on 07.09.2005. Thereafter, during May, 2005, an enquiry was conducted under Section 82 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 (hereinafter, it may be referred to as "the Act") by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies. This ultimately, resulted in issuance of a















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top