Full Judgment Text
1
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1849 OF 2012
DR. T. MURUGAN Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE CHAIRMAN NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA
SAMITI AND ORS. Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN, J.
1 . The appellant is before this Court
challenging the order dated 13.06.2008 passed by
the High Court of Judicature at Madras in W.P.
No. 38815 of 2006.
2. The appellant had approached the Central
Administrative Tribunal (in short, “CAT”)
challenging his termination by the respondent
dated 13.06.2003. The appellant started his
service in 05.06.1989 as a Teacher in Navodaya
Vidyalaya School. In 1998, he became the
Vice-Principal of the school. From 2001 onwards,
he was serving as the Principal of the school.
3. On allegations pertaining to sexual
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
JAYANT KUMAR ARORA
Date: 2018.02.09
16:43:53 IST
Reason:
harassment of a student of Class X, he was put
under suspension on 18.12.2002 and after
2
conducting an inquiry by a three-Member
Committee, he was dismissed from service by an
order dated 13.06.2003. The CAT set aside the
order of termination and directed reinstatement
of the appellant with back wages. That order was
challenged by the respondent before the High
Court. The High Court set aside the order passed
by the CAT and upheld the order of termination.
Thus aggrieved, the appellant is before this
Court by way of special leave.
4. We have heard the learned counsel appearing
for the appellant as well as the learned counsel
appearing for the respondent extensively. We
have also gone through the records. We do not
think it necessary to refer to the factual matrix
in detail. However, we deem it necessary to
refer to one main contention raised by the
appellant that his entry to the premises of the
student was in the company of a Chaukidar of the
School and that too, on getting an information
that the student was not appearing for the
examination. The allegation is that the appellant
tried to sexually harass the student. The Deputy
Director held against the appellant and so also
3
by the three-Member Committee. However, the
District Collector ordered a Magisterial Inquiry
and in that inquiry, the appellant has been
completely exonerated.
5. Whether we should rely on the Magisterial
Inquiry or the Inquiry held by the three-Member
Committee is one issue, but the fact remains that
the regular inquiry under the CCS
(Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965
was dispensed with. We would also like to take
note of one special factual position that the
student has, in fact, appeared for the
examination after the alleged incident. The
appellant has a serious grievance that he was not
served a copy of the report of the three-Member
Committee and, therefore, he did not get an
opportunity to challenge the same. These aspects
have been discussed at length by the CAT.
6. The High Court, it appears, has taken note of
the report prepared by the Deputy Director and
has placed heavy reliance on that. But
unfortunately, the allegation raised by the
appellant that the wife of the Deputy Director
was a teacher in a different school under the
4
Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti and that the Deputy
Director had some motive against the appellant,
which he stated in the inquiry before the
Committee, has not been noticed.
7. We are informed that the appellant is due to
retire on 12.02.2018. We are also informed that
there is no Regular Pension Scheme under the
Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti. Though it would have
been a case where we should have set aside the
whole proceedings and directed the competent
authority to start from the stage of furnishing a
copy of the inquiry report and give an
opportunity for objections and thereafter,
hearing etc., having regard to the fact that the
appellant is otherwise due to superannuate from
service in the next month, we are of the view
that this Court should invoke its jurisdiction
under Article 142 of the Constitution of India
and give a quietus to the whole litigation
between the parties, respecting the dignity and
protecting the rights of all the parties.
8. Accordingly this appeal is disposed of with
the following directions :-
5
i) On the date of termination i.e. 13.06.2003,
the appellant shall be deemed to have voluntarily
retired from service.
ii) Till such time, the appellant shall be deemed
to be in service for all purposes. The benefits
arising from such service upto 13.06.2003 shall
be worked out and paid to him with simple
interest at the rate of 6% per annum upto
13.06.2003 within a period of three months from
today.
iii) In order to work out the relief as above,
the Judgment under appeal and the other impugned
orders shall stand set aside.
9. We make it clear that this Judgment is passed
in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this
case and shall not be treated as a precedent.
No costs.
.......................J.
[ KURIAN JOSEPH ]
.......................J.
[ MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR ]
New Delhi;
January 31, 2018.
6
ITEM NO.19 COURT NO.5 SECTION XII
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal No(s). 1849 of 2012
DR. T. MURUGAN Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE CHAIRMAN NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA SAMITI
AND ORS. Respondent(s)
Date : 31-01-2018 This appeal was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
For Appellant(s) Mr. M. A. Aruneshe, Adv.
Ms. Madhu Sikri, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. S. Rajappa, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
The civil appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed
non-reportable Judgment.
Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (RENU DIWAN)
COURT MASTER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(Signed non-reportable Judgment is placed on the file)