Safiya Malik

The Kerala High Court Single Bench of Justice N. Nagaresh has adjudicated in favor of the continuation of the suspension of a school staff member, asserting that the presence of prima facie material justified further inquiry. The case involved allegations surrounding the disappearance of a student attendance register, with the court determining that the accused's reinstatement could adversely affect the investigation.

The matter was brought before the court by the petitioner, N. Divijendar Reddy, who serves as the Manager of Raja Ravi Varma Girls Higher Secondary School, Kilimanoor. The petitioner sought judicial approval for the continued suspension of the fourth respondent, Sajeev Kumar S., a Lab Assistant at the school, pending the completion of an inquiry into allegations of misconduct.

According to the petition, on January 7, 2025, the attendance register for the Plus One Commerce Batch was reported missing by the class teacher. The register, which contained essential records of student attendance, was considered a critical document. Despite extensive searches, it could not be located. Subsequently, a Higher Secondary School Teacher (HSST) in Computer Science, Smt. Chithra Varma R., received a text message from the fourth respondent. The message contained personal details, including the name, address, and Aadhaar number of a student from the affected class, raising concerns regarding a potential breach of confidentiality.

Also Read: Supreme Court Orders Repatriation of Cognitively Impaired Adult, Directs Guardian to Ensure Welfare and Medical Oversight

Following this incident, the school's administration reviewed CCTV footage, which allegedly showed the fourth respondent taking the attendance register on the morning of January 7, 2025. The footage was later submitted as evidence. The matter was formally reported to the Regional Deputy Director (RDD) on January 13, 2025, and an FIR was lodged at Kilimanoor Police Station. The FIR documented the circumstances surrounding the missing register and the subsequent findings implicating the fourth respondent.

The school authorities, citing the gravity of the allegations, suspended the fourth respondent under Rule 67 of Chapter XIVA of the Kerala Education Rules (KER). This provision allows for the suspension of staff members under specific circumstances where misconduct is suspected. The third respondent, the Regional Deputy Director, initially approved the suspension. However, as per regulatory guidelines, suspension beyond a period of fifteen days requires express approval. The RDD limited the suspension extension to only fifteen days, prompting the petitioner to challenge this decision, asserting that the allegations warranted an extended suspension until the completion of the inquiry.

The petitioner subsequently appealed to the Government of Kerala, arguing that allowing the fourth respondent to resume duty while the inquiry was pending would compromise the investigation. This appeal was rejected, leading to the filing of the present writ petition before the High Court.

The court undertook a thorough examination of the materials placed before it, including the FIR, the CCTV footage, and the communication records between the staff members. The court noted that "taking away the attendance register of a current live batch of students is a serious offence" and observed that such an act could "adversely affect the reputation of the school as well as the career of the students’ undergoing studies." It further stated that "the existence of prima facie materials linking the fourth respondent to the incident warranted further inquiry."

The court also addressed the issue of administrative handling of the suspension, noting that the RDD had acknowledged the gravity of the allegations but had simultaneously limited the suspension period to an additional fifteen days only. The court observed that "if there is prima facie material to indicate the involvement of the fourth respondent in the offence, then it would not be proper for the school authorities to permit the fourth respondent to discharge his duties, continuing in the school, which is likely to adversely affect the inquiry."

The court further examined the procedural requirements under Rule 67(8) of Chapter XIVA KER, which empowers the controlling authority to conduct a preliminary investigation into the allegations leading to suspension and to approve the continuation of such suspension where warranted. It recorded that "in circumstances where misconduct is serious in nature, preventing interference in the inquiry should take precedence over immediate reinstatement." The court found that "in this instance, there is sufficient justification for the school authorities to seek an extended suspension period."

Also Read: Allahabad High Court Denies Bail To Doctor Accused Of Raping Dalit On-Duty Nurse At Midnight

Responding to arguments presented by the fourth respondent, the court noted that he had contended that the dispute arose due to pre-existing management-related conflicts within the school administration. The court, however, refrained from making any findings on this aspect, holding that "the focus of the present proceedings is limited to the validity of the suspension order and not extraneous disputes."

Furthermore, the court remarked that "educational authorities are not empowered to come to interim conclusions before completion of the inquiry proceedings." The court stated that "administrative decisions concerning disciplinary actions must be aligned with the need to ensure a fair and uninterrupted inquiry process."

In its final judgement, the court set aside the prior order limiting the suspension period and permitted the school authorities to keep the fourth respondent under suspension for an additional three months. It directed that the inquiry proceedings be completed within this period. The fourth respondent was granted the right to receive subsistence allowance during the suspension as per applicable regulations.

Case Title: N. Divijendar Reddy v. State of Kerala & Others
Neutral Citation: 2025:KER:18254
Case Number: W.P.(C) No. 6666 of 2025
Bench: Justice N. Nagaresh

[Read/Download order]