1. Termination of a teacher under Article 81(B) of the KVS Education Code for alleged sexual misconduct towards a student. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 13339
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Sudhi Ranjan Mishra, J, Pramod Kumar Das, Administrative Member
Binaya Kumar Das – Appellant
Versus
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan – Respondent
O.A./356/2022
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: J.K. Rath
For the Respondents: H.K. Tripathy
For the Appellants/Petitioners: J.K. Rath
For the Respondents: H.K. Tripathy
Termination of service is unsustainable if the inquiry committee violates mandatory composition requirements of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013, particularly when identical criminal charges result in acquittal, making the disciplinary punishment unjust and oppressive.
Headnote:(A) Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 - Section 4 - Internal Complaints Committee - Composition and Mandate - Constitution of a committee for inquiry into sexual harassment must strictly adhere to the statutory requirements, including the inclusion of a member from a non-governmental organization or association committed to the cause of women. Any committee formed in contravention of these mandatory requirements loses its legal force, and subsequent orders based on such reports are unsustainable. (Paras 32, 36, 38)
(B) Service Law - Education Code - Article 81(B) - Termination for immoral behavior - While departmental proceedings and criminal prosecutions are separate and can run simultaneously, if the charges, evidence, witnesses, and circumstances in both are identical or substantially similar, upholding findings in disciplinary proceedings following an acquittal in the criminal case may be unjust, unfair, and oppressive. (Paras 29, 30)
(C) Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 - Application of rules in disciplinary proceedings - Procedural fairness and adherence to statutory laws override internal codes when the penalty involves termination of service. (Paras 37-38)
Facts of the case:
A teacher was terminated from service following a summary enquiry conducted under the Education Code after being accused of sexual harassment of a student during private tuition. Parallel criminal proceedings were initiated involving the same facts and witnesses, which resulted in the acquittal of the teacher. The departmental termination was based on a report from an internal committee composed solely of school staff, without the mandatory external member required under the 2013 Act.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the inquiry committee was constituted in contradiction to Section 4 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. Furthermore, as the criminal and departmental proceedings involved identical evidence and witnesses, the acquittal in the criminal court rendered the disciplinary punishment oppressive and unjust.
Issues: Whether the termination based on a summary enquiry is legally sustainable given the non-compliance with the mandatory composition of the Internal Complaints Committee under the 2013 Act and the subsequent acquittal of the employee in identical criminal proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: An inquiry committee formed without adhering to the mandatory requirements of the 2013 Act regarding its composition lacks legal validity. Where the evidence and witnesses in departmental and criminal proceedings are substantially similar, an acquittal in the criminal trial justifies the quashing of the disciplinary punishment to avoid an unfair and oppressive outcome. (Paras 38-39)
Result: OA allowed. Impugned orders quashed. Respondents directed to treat the applicant as continuing in service until the age of superannuation and grant all entitled retirement dues.
Legal Category Hierarchy
- administrative law
- crime and sentencing
- practice and procedure
-
constitutional law
-
fundamental rights
- right to equality (Para 32)
-
fundamental rights
- service law
Table of Contents
2. Dispute over validity of summary proceedings under Article 81(B) vs. regular inquiry under CCS(CCA) Rules following criminal acquittal. (Para 9 , 25 , 10 )
3. The Internal Committee was formed in contravention of Section 4 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 )
4. Proceedings under Article 81(B) based on an illegally constituted committee are unsustainable, especially after a criminal acquittal on identical facts. (Para 38 , 39 )
5. Quashed termination and appeal orders, directed treating teacher as continuing in service until superannuation with retirement dues. (Para 39 , 40 )
6. Is an inquiry under Article 81(B) of the KVS Education Code sustainable if the Internal Committee is not constituted as per Section 4 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013?
No, the summary inquiry loses legal force if the committee is formed contrary to the mandatory requirements of the 2013 Act, rendering the proceedings unsustainable. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 )
7. Does an acquittal in a criminal case on identical facts and evidence automatically affect a parallel disciplinary proceeding?
Yes, when charges, evidence, witnesses, and circumstances are substantially similar, upholding a disciplinary finding after acquittal can be unjust, unfair, and oppressive. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 )
.....Respondents For the Applicant : Mr. J.K. Rath, Counsel For the Respondents : Mr. H.K. Tripathy, Counsel O R D E R SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA, MEMBER (J):
This O.A. has been filed by the applicant under Section, 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 with the following prayers:
“In view of the facts stated above, the Hon’ble Tribunal be pleased to quash the order passed by the Opp. Party No.2 dated 28.06.2021 (A/11) communicated to the petitioner by the Deputy Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan vide Annexure-11 to the Original Application and the order of the Appellate Authority passed by rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner dated 27.04.2022 Annexure-14 to the writ application and the Hon’ble Tribunal be pleased to direct the Opp. Parties to treat the petitioner to be continuing in service till the age of superannuation and the petitioner is entitled to all service benefits including the retirtual benefits since the petitioner has, in the meantime, reached the age of superannuation.”
2. The facts of the case are that the applicant was appointed as TGT (PCM) and joined on 30.10.1986 in KVS, Balco, M.P. Thereafter, he was promoted to the Post Graduate Teacher (PGT) (Chemistry) on 29.09.1995. While he was continuing as such, in the year 2011, he was transferred and posted to KVS No.1 (2nd Shift), BBSR, and while continuing as such in KVS No.1 (2nd Shift), BBSR, an FIR was lodged by the father of a girl student in the said School alleging sexual abuse to his daughter reading in Class-XII of K.V.No.1. The applicant was taken to judicial custody by the order of the Sessions Judge, Khurda in P.S.Case No.24 dated 14.01.2016 which was converted to T.R.No.5/2016. Due to his arrest and detention in judicial custody beyond 48 hours, applicant was placed under deemed suspension with effect from 14.01.2016 vide order dated 18.01.2016. He was thereafter, released on bail vide order dated 11.02.2016. After his released he submitted representation to Respondent No.4 to allow him to resume his duty. Vide order dated 10.03.2016, Respondent No.2 revoked the suspension and posted him at K.V., Srikakulam. While the matter stood thus, applicant was directed to appear before the preliminary enquiry committee on 06.12.2016 for the allegation of sexual abuse to the victim girl which was the subject matter of criminal case in T.R.No.5/2016 pending before the Sessions Judge, Khurda. The appearance of the applicant before the Preliminary Inquiry Committee, was, however, deferred to 19.12.2016 on the ground of illness of the applicant. The applicant appeared before the Inquiry Committee on 19.12.2016 and submitted that the matter is sub judice before Sessions Judge and his defence in the criminal case will be prejudiced in case his defence in the proceedings under contemplation is disclosed. It is stated by the applicant that on 23.12.2016(A/3) the Preliminary Inquiry Officer submitted report of the Preliminary Inquiry Committee holding as under:
“Preliminary inquiry under 81(B) of KVS Education Code against Sh. Binaya Kumar Das, Ex. PGT (Chem.) of Kendriya Vidyalaya No-1, 2 shift, Bhubaneswar, presently posted at Kendriya Vidyalaya Srikakulam in connection with his alleged offense of sexual abuse to Ms. Anchal Dash, Ex-student of Class-XII (2015-16 Hatch) on 14.01.2016 while imparting her private tuition at her residence at Plot No-122 A, Satya Nagar, Bhubaneswar.
CONCLUSIVE REPORT BY THE PRELIMINARY INQUIRY COMMITTEE On the basis of the complaints dated 14.01.2016 & 06.12.2016 along with video & audio clips from Mr. Umesh Prasad Dash F/O Ms. Anchal Dash, the police FIR at police station, Kharavel Nagar, Bhubaneswar, the Newspaper cutting dated 15.01.2016, the recorded statements of the complainants father- Mr. Umesh Prasad Dash, his wife-Smt. Sarita Dash, the victun girl-Ms.Anchal Dash, the witnesses- Mr Bibhu Kalyan Panda & Mr. Soumyaranjan Pattanayak and the statement of Mrs. Kaberi Das, W/O-Mr. BK Das, the charged official Mr. B K D
