JUDGMENT :

J. NISHA BANU, J.

Prayer: Review Application filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to review the order dated 09.02.2021 in W.P. (MD) No. 1170 of 2012.

1. This review application has been filed to review the order dated 09.02.2021 in W.P. (MD) No. 1170 of 2012.

2. The petitioner filed the above writ petition questioning the order dismissing him from service passed by the 4th respondent dated 04.01.2012 and to direct the 3rd and 4th respondents to reinstate him into service with all service and monetary benefits. In the writ petition, the petitioner contended that he was appointed as Junior Assistant in the 4th respondent Polytechnic College on 01.09.1993 and he was promoted as Assistant on 25.02.2000. While so, the 5th respondent took charge as Manager on 10.05.2010 and he commanded to do several things which were not appropriate under law. As the petitioner did not cooperate with the 5th respondent to do so, on 22.09.2010 the 5th respondent made the 4th respondent/Principal to suspend the petitioner from service on the vague allegations of disobeying their instructions and behaving in a disorderly manner. The 4th respondent without the approval of the Governing Council, issued the suspension order. On 12.11.2010, the 4th respondent issued a charge memo levelling six charges. The petitioner has sent a representation on 16.11.2010 requesting to provide certain documents and to grant 30 days time to submit explanation which was refused by the 4th respondent directing the petitioner to submit his explanation within seven days. Thereafter, on 02.12.2010 the petitioner has submitted his explanation. On 07.12.2010, the 4th respondent issued a letter stating that there were some typographical error in the charge memo at charge Nos. 1 and 3. The petitioner has submitted his explanation on 18.12.2010.

3. The petitioner has further contended that challenging the order of suspension, he filed W.P. (MD) No. 2580 of 2011. While so, the 4th respondent sent a letter dated 01.04.2011 informing about appointment of an Enquiry Officer and directing him to attend enquiry on 11.04.2011. On 04.04.2011, the petitioner sent a letter requesting the 4th respondent to defer the enquiry in view of pendency of the above writ petition which was refused. The Enquiry Officer sent a letter dated 15.04.2011 to the petitioner to attend enquiry on 21.04.2011. The petitioner has sent a letter to the Enquiry Officer requesting to defer the enquiry. The Enquiry Officer, by his letter dated 22.04.2011, refused to defer the enquiry and directed the petitioner to attend the enquiry on 29.04.2011 or otherwise the enquiry would be conducted ex-parte. Again, the petitioner sent a letter to the Enquiry Officer to defer the enquiry on 28.04.2011. However, the Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry in the absence of the petitioner on 29.04.2011 and submitted a report on 15.05.2011 holding that the petitioner is guilty of all the charges. The 4th respondent issued a show cause notice dated 08.06.2011 enclosing a copy of the enquiry report. Challenging the said show cause notice, the petitioner has filed another writ petition in W.P. (MD) No. 6116 of 2011. This Court, by order dated 13.10.2011, dismissed both the writ petitions i.e. W.P. (MD) No. 2580 of 2011 and W.P. (MD) No. 6116 of 2011. However, this Court had granted time to the petitioner to submit his explanation to the second show cause notice. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted his explanation on 02.11.2011. Thereafter, the 4th respondent, by order dated 04.01.2012, dismissed the petitioner from service, against which, the petitioner filed the above writ petition.

4. This Court after considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondents, by order dated 09.02.2021, has passed the following order in the writ petition:

“11. In this case, totally six charges were framed against the petitioner alleging misconduct, disobedience and temporary misappropriation of fu