Heard both sides
2.The petitioner has filed O.A.No.9019 of 1997, seeking to challenge the orders of the first respondent, dated 25.11.1996 and 29.10.1997 and the order of the second respondent, dated 17.7.1997.
3.In view of the abolition of the Tribunal, the matter stood transferred to this court and was renumbered as W.P.No.30888 of 2006. On notice from the Tribunal, the first respondent has filed a reply affidavit, dated 19.7.2001.
4.The petitioner was working as a Headmaster in the Government High School, Suradimangalam, Kanchipuram District. He was charge sheeted on the ground that he had failed to serve the notice of reinstatement ordered by the Joint Director on one D.Ramachandran, who was working as an Assistant. Inspite of the specific direction, he refused to permit the said Ramachandran to join duty. Because of this, a memorandum under Rule 17(a) was issued to the petitioner on 8.10.95. After receiving the petitioner's explanation, he was issued with a warning by an order, dated 3.1.96.
5.Since he refused to permit the Assistant D.Ramachandran to join duty, the period from 28.10.94 till 8.3.95 was treated as a compulsory leave and the Government was forced to incur extra expenditure. Therefore, the first respondent, by an order dated 25.11.96 directed a recovery of a sum of Rs.15278/- and the petitioner was directed to make good the amount being the loss caused to the Government. It is this order, which forms first portion of the order challenged in the O.A. filed by the petitioner. In fact, the petitioner had filed a review petition which was also rejected by the first respondent by an order, dated 31.5.97.
6.The petitioner in the meanwhile had reached the age of superannuation on 31.10.1997. He asked for re-employment till the end of the academic year, namely from the date of his superannuation till 31.5.1998. This request was rejected by the first respondent, by an order, dated 29.10.97. It was stated by the respondents in that order that the petitioner's conduct was not satisfactory and therefore, he will not be given re-employment as a matter of right. It is this order, which became a part of the second prayer in the O.A.
7.Mr.Muthukannu, the learned counsel for the petitioner has no answer for the lapse committed by the petitioner in not allowing the Assistant to join duty despite directions from his Superiors. The action of the petitioner had resulted in a revenue loss, namely payment of salary for the said Ramachandran by treating the period as compulsory wait. Therefore, there was nothing wrong in the petitioner being directed to make good the loss of revenue sustained by the State.
8.With reference to the second prayer, namely a direction to continue till the end of the academic year, the learned counsel placed reliance upon the decision of a Division Bench in Correspondent, Secretary and Managing Trustee, Salem Vs. M.Rajagopalan and others reported in (2008) 1 MLJ 312. That case arose out of a College Lecturer requesting re-employment. In the Government Order relating to the College Lecturers' re-employment, no conditionality was imposed. But, in a present case, the petitioner's right flows from the Government Order applicable to school teachers. By the said order, a teacher is not entitled for automatic re-employment and the teacher has to satisfy the department with reference to the satisfactory nature of his service and he must be found fit medically to serve the remaining tenure.
9.In the present case, admittedly, the petitioner was imposed with a penalty of warning for his conduct of not obeying the orders of the Superior. Since that punishment was not under challenge and it has become final, it cannot be said that his service record was clean.
10.In the light of the above, there is no case made out to entertain the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.
vvk To
1.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai-600 006.
2.The District Adult Education Officer, Collector's complex, Vridhunagar.
3.The Director of Non-formal and Adult Education, College Road, Chennai-600 006.
4.The Secretary to the Government, Education Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009