A.Chengalrayan v. District Education Officer, Tiruvallur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN and W.M.P.No.24286 of 2025 A. Chengalrayan ... Petitioner Vs.
1.
District Education Officer, Tiruvallur, Tiruvallur - 631 201.
2.
Development Education Officer, Pallipattu, Pallipattu-631 207.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking for an issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of District Educational Officer Na.Ka.3397/A3/2024 dated 26.02.2025 issued by the first respondent and quash the same, consequently direct the second respondent to issue fresh order of reinstation in the service. For Petitioner : Mr.G.Thyagarajan For Respondents : Mr.S.Mythreye Chandru Special Government Pleader
ORDER
The writ petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in Na.Ka.3397/A3/2024 dated 26.02.2025 issued by the first respondent and consequently to direct the second respondent to issue fresh order of reinstation in the service.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he rendered 18 years of service as Headmaster at Pallipattu PUP School, Tiruvallur District. His wife lent money to locals Chiranjeevi and Varalakshmi, and when the petitioner demanded repayment of Rs.30,000/- on 05.11.2024, they allegedly foisted a false case against him with the help of others, accusing him of abusing a student. The DSP, Tiruttani, rejected their complaint after inquiry. Despite being on leave during the alleged incident, the petitioner was suspended, remanded to judicial custody for 26 days, and dismissed from service based on a report by the Block Education Officer without proper verification. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in a criminal case and pursuant thereto, he was terminated from service.
4. However, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the petitioner was charged under the POCSO Act, was remanded to judicial custody, and that the criminal case is pending against him. He further submits that, pursuant to the said criminal complaint, departmental proceedings were initiated against the petitioner and after following due procedure and conducting a detailed enquiry, the petitioner was terminated from service by order dated 26.02.2025. It is further submitted that the Joint Director of Elementary Education is the competent appellate authority to challenge the said order of punishment.
5. In view of the availability of an alternative remedy, this Court do not find any merit in the present writ petition.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, granting liberty to the petitioner to challenge the impugned order dated 26.02.2025 before the appellate authority, namely, the Joint Director of Elementary Education, in accordance with law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
18.06.2025 nsl Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order To 1.
The District Education Officer, Tiruvallur, Tiruvallur - 631 201.
2.
The Development Education Officer, Pallipattu, Pallipattu-631 207.
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
nsl 18.06.2025