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

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 2779

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
B.K. Shrivastava, Judicial Member, Santosh Mehra, Administrative Member
Umesh Babu M. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/00228/2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: B.S. Venkatesh Kumar
For the Respondents: Vishnu Bhat

Summary domestic inquiry under special notification valid for teacher sexual misconduct cases protecting girl students; natural justice met via document perusal and cross-examination opportunity; bias not proved by official capacity impleadment; dismissal upheld as proportionate.

Headnote:(A) Service Law - Disciplinary proceedings - Moral turpitude - Sexual misconduct by teacher towards girl students - Notification dated 20.12.1993 permitting summary domestic inquiry dispensing with regular CCS (CCA) Rules inquiry upheld as valid where regular inquiry would cause serious embarrassment to students; opportunity to peruse documents (without copies to protect identity), examine/cross-examine committee authors provided; allegations of bias against inquiry committee member rejected as she was impleaded in official capacity only and no personal animosity shown - Upholding validity of penalty of termination and appellate order. (Paras 10, 13-21, 26-32)

(B) Natural Justice - Bias - Reasonable apprehension of bias not established merely by naming officer in contempt proceedings in official capacity; officer must be made party to challenge bias; doctrine requires real likelihood or reasonable suspicion viewed objectively from public perspective. (Paras 13-15, 21)

(C) Role of Teacher - Elevated status as moulder of young minds demands impeccable character; misconduct involving temptation with gifts, inappropriate physical contact, embarrassing questions with students warrants severe punishment like dismissal to protect institutional integrity. (Paras 33-39)

Facts of the case:
Arts teacher appointed in 1995 faced allegations of immoral sexual behaviour towards girl students established in initial summary inquiry leading to termination quashed by High Court for lack of full domestic inquiry opportunity (except cross-examination of girl students); reinstated post Supreme Court dismissal of appeal/review; fresh domestic inquiry under reconstituted committee found guilt proved, leading to second termination and dismissal of departmental appeal.

Findings of Court:
Domestic inquiry conducted fairly per Notification dated 20.12.1993; all opportunities including document perusal, cross-examination of prior committee members provided; no prejudice caused by non-supply of copies protecting student identity; no bias established; penalty proportionate to proved misconduct.

Issues: (1) Compliance with High Court direction for domestic inquiry opportunity; (2) Violation of natural justice via non-supply of documents, denial of cross-examination, biased committee member; (3) Applicability of summary procedure under special notification vs. regular CCS rules; (4) Proportionality of dismissal penalty.

Ratio Decidendi: Summary inquiry procedure valid for protecting minor girl students from trauma of regular inquiry; principles of natural justice satisfied through perusal opportunity, examination rights; bias allegation untenable without evidence of personal stake or influence; teacher's misconduct merits dismissal to safeguard students.

Result: Original Application dismissed; penalty and appellate orders upheld.

Table of Content
1. procedural history of oa amendment (Para 1)
2. second domestic enquiry and termination (Para 2)
3. applicant's arguments on violations (Para 3 , 4)
4. respondents' defense on enquiry fairness (Para 5)
5. compliance with high court cross-examination order (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
6. documents supplied adequately (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
7. no reasonable apprehension of bias (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
8. enquiry and penalty justified (Para 22 , 23 , 24)
9. nvs 1993 notification valid for summary enquiry (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32)
10. teacher's conduct demands exemplary punishment (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39)
11. oa dismissed, no interference (Para 40 , 41 , 42)

O R D E R

PER: JUSTICE B.K. SHRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (J)

1. Initially, this OA was filed on 05.06.2023 for quashment of the penalty order dated 12.09.2022 (Annexure – A1). At the time of filing this O.A., the departmental appeal preferred by the applicant was pending. During pendency of the petition, the appeal was also decided. Therefore, the applicant filed MA No.109/2024 which was allowed on 06.03.2024 and the challenge against the appellate order dated 26.10.2023 (Annexure – A21) was also included. At present, the reliefs claimed by the petitioner in amended OA dated 01.04.2024 are as under:-

“(a) Call for records of the case from the respondents and on perusal.

(b) Quash and set aside the impugned penalty Order passed in F No.8-3/(1)/2019-NVS(E.III)/27307-10 dated 12.9.2022 (Annexure A1) passed by the second respondent.

(c) Quash and set aside the appellate order bearing No. 8-3(1)/2019-NVS(E.III) dated 26.10.2023 (Annexure A21) passed by the third respondent and consequently issue a direction to the respondents to reinstate the applicant into service with all consequential benefits including the back wages, service seniority and other benefits.

(d) Grant such other relief/s as this Hon’ble Tribunal deems fit to grant to the applicant in the circumstances of the case including an order as to costs of this OA in the interests of justice.”

2. Facts of the Case

a) The applicant was appointed as Arts Teacher on 25.03.1995 at Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Koraput, Orissa. Thereafter, he was transferred on 04.08.2001 to Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Mundargi, Gadag district and he joined on 04.08.2001.

b) A written complaint regarding moral turpitude involving exhibition of immoral sexual behaviour towards girl students was received against the applicant and respondents conducted a fact finding enquiry in which the allegations were found proved. Thereafter, in exercising the power confirmed under the provision of Notification No. 14-2/93-NVS (Vig.) dated 20.12.1993 a Summary Trial Committee was constituted in which the following Members were included:-

 Mrs. Kiran Chandra, Ex-Dy Commissioner (Trg), NVS, Hqrs – Convenor

 Shri A.B. Bharadwaj, Ex-Asst Commissioner (Acad), NVS, Hqrs – Member

 Shri S. Chandrashekharan, Ex-Asst. Commissioner (Trg) NVS, Hqrs – Member

c) The Committee submitted the Report dated 04.03.2013 in which the applicant was found guilty. Therefore, his services were terminated vide order dated 16.04.2013 (Annexure – A5).

d) The applicant challenged the aforesaid order before the CAT, Bangalore Bench by filing OA No.285/2014 which was dismissed on 02.06.2014.

e) Against the dismissal of the aforesaid OA, the applicant filed a writ petition before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench. The aforesaid Writ Petition No.205259/2014 (S-CAT) was decided by the High Court on 12.03.2019 and the High Court observed that serious allegations were levelled against the petitioner and the major penalty has been imposed therefore, applicant was entitled to adduce evidence and cross-examination of the official respondents, even though examination and cross-examination is not permissible in respect of girl students in a matter of sexual harassment. Thereafter, the High Court quashed the Tribunal order dated 02.06.2014 passed in O

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top