Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N.NAGARESH, J
SAJAN N.S. – Appellant
Versus
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. suspension of an employee must adhere to legal procedures. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. initiation of disciplinary action requires proper authority and procedure. (Para 4 , 6 , 9) |
| 3. court orders regarding subsistence allowance during ongoing proceedings. (Para 7 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 16th day of February, 2026 [W.P.(C) Nos.44913/2025 and 2684/2026]
The petitioner in these writ petitions, is an Aided School Teacher working in the 5th respondent’s School. The petitioner states that he was placed under suspension on 16.07.2019. A criminal case is also pending against the petitioner for the alleged offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act , 2012. The writ petitions are filed seeking to quash Charge Sheet and to direct the respondent to pay substantial allowance.
2. The petitioner would submit that the Manager issued Ext.P5 Charge Memo and thereafter he terminated the petitioner from service, subject to sanction of the Deputy Director of Education. The Deputy Director of Education has not granted sanction to Ext.P7 punishment.
3. Subsequently, the Deputy Director of Education himself has issued Ext.P9 Charge Memo along with Ext.P8 statem
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
