K.Sivaraman v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 12.03.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP CRL.O.P (MD) No.3917 of 2024 K.Sivaraman
...Petitioner
vs 1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Karur District.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kuithalai, Karur District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Kulithalai Police Station, Karur District.
4.P.Ragupathi 5.Sundarapandian
...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying, to direct the Respondents 1 to 3 to provide protection for life and liberty of the Petitioner from the Respondents 4 and 5 by considering the 1/8
Petitioner's representation dated 04.01.2024 in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Alagumani For R1 to R3 : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Crl.side)
O R D E R
The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is serving as Assistant Project Officer in Samagra Shiksha Scheme functioning under the Aegis of the Department of School Education, Government of Tamil Nadu. The Petitioner joined the service on 18.07.2002. While so, the Petitioner went as an Observer in a school near Thogaimalai, Karur for the training programme of Ennum Ezhuthum Scheme, which was started by the Tamil Nadu School Education Department. This programme was conducted from 03.10.2023 to 06.10.2023 for training the Government School Teachers teaching in Classes I to V.
2.On 03.10.2023, the programme commenced at the Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Kulithalai, Karur District, under the 2/8
leadership of Block Educational Officer, in which a Lecturer from the District Institute for Educational Training will brief the School teachers about the Ennum Ezhuthum Scheme. When the lecture commenced, one participant in the programme, P.Ragupathi, the fourth respondent, who was working as Secondary Grade Teacher in Panchayat Union Primary School, Keelapatti, Karur District, behaved in a rude manner against the Block Educational Officer and the Lecturer. While the Block Educational Officer enquired about the reason for his protest, the fourth Respondent had stated that he and the other Teachers will participate in the training programme only if the chairs are provided for himself and others. The Block Development Officer requested the participant to sit in the Bench. The fourth Respondent responded in a unruly manner.
He also interrupted the lecture classes. Subsequently, 4 chairs were arranged for those, who wanted to hear the lecture sitting on the chair. Still the fourth Respondent continued to raise his voice in a rude manner stating that he will not allow the meeting to commence, until all the participants are furnished with chairs. 3.
conduct of the Ennum Ezhuthum Scheme. Therefore, he had visited the said School. When the Petitioner visited the School and requested the Respondents 4 and 5, they had responded violently, interrupted the smooth conduct of the lecture and training programme. The intention of the training programme was explained by the Petitioner, for which the Respondents 4 and 5 abused the Petitioner in filthy language by hurling abusive words in the presence of all the participants and the Block Educational Officer. They also intimidated the Petitioner stating that ehd; ,dpNky; cd;id ,q;Nf ghh;j;jhy; mbj;J fhyp nra;J tpLNtd;. Further, the Respondents 4 and 5 instigated the other participants to protest and boycott the lecture class. The Petitioner had filed a report to the higher Officials of the Education Department. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Respondents 4 and 5 had threatened the Petitioner. Therefore, he seeks police protection.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), on instruction of the Respondents 1 to 3, submits that there was protest by the participants that they were not provided with chairs and they were forced to sit on the benches. Except that, there was no other occurrence. Based on the protest by 4/8
the two participants, the Department of Education had ordered enquiry by the higher Officials and the same is pending. The Petitioner had sent the complaint through Post.
5.Considering the submission made by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), the apprehension expressed by the Petitioner is found not threatening as apprehended by him. There had been misunderstanding between the participants and the persons, who had arranged the training programme. The participants were asked to sit on the benches as primary School students. It is to be noted that the training programme was conducted in a school. Participants are the Teachers in a Primary School. Therefore, there had been fault on the part of the Organizers, who organized such training programme. The teachers had demanded self respect as Teachers and not as primary School students sitting on the benches. The protest by the teachers, who had instigated his colleagues to boycott the lecture class, had instigated the Petitioner to lodge a complaint.
5/8
6.If really the Petitioner was threatened, he should have immediately approached the Police concerned for immediate action, in which case, the primary school teachers and also the employees in Government service could have been arrested, suspended and also lead to loss of job. There is nothing for the Petitioner to be scared of the teachers, who are alleged to have threatened him. For showing disrespect to the Higher Officials of the Education Department, the Education Department is seized of the matter, which will render justice to the Petitioner herein, whose position was challenged by the participants in the training programme, particularly the training programme for primary school teachers. 7.
The contention of the Petitioner to provide him police protection wherever he visits is found unwarranted, considering the man power shortage in the Police Department and considering the nature of the apprehension expressed by the Petitioner. Considering the disrespect shown to the Higher Official by a primary school teacher, the Education Department is seized of the matter.
or suspension or even dismissal, which is up to the Education Department concerned. The request of the Petitioner is found unacceptable and unreasonable.
Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Internet:Yes./No 12.03.2024 Index:Yes/No mm To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Karur District.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kuithalai, Karur District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Kulithalai Police Station, Karur District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
7/8
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP , J.
mm CRL.O.P (MD) No.3917 of 2024 12.03.2024 8/8