SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

Education To Girl Child Is Nation’s Asset’; Madras HC Upholds Termination Of Principal For Indulging In Homo-Sexual Activities With Students “The petitioner, who was working as the Principal of the Polytechnic Institute, had indulged in homosexual activities with the polytechnic students. A person with such a conduct and character cannot be allowed to continue in employment, that too, as a Principal of a Polytechnic Institute. That apart, the petitioner had also made derogatory remarks, writing in filthy language against the teaching staff in the notice board and had allowed the students to read, which would establish that the petitioner is unfit to continue as the Principal of the Polytechnic Institute,” Justice M Duraiswamy said

by ·

 
Home
/
News Updates
/
Education To Girl…


NEWS UPDATES‘Education To Girl Child Is Nation’s Asset’; Madras HC Upholds Termination Of Principal For Indulging In Homo-Sexual Activities With Students [Read Judgment]

AKSHITA SAXENA25 Dec 2019 10:21 AM







183
SHARES






The Madras High Court upheld the termination of the Principal of Dharmapuri District Co-operative Sugar Mills Polytechnic, who was accused of indulging in homo-sexual activities with the polytechnic students and making filthy remarks against teaching staff, apart from other administrative wrongdoings.


“The petitioner, who was working as the Principal of the Polytechnic Institute, had indulged in homosexual activities with the polytechnic students. A person with such a conduct and character cannot be allowed to continue in employment, that too, as a Principal of a Polytechnic Institute. That apart, the petitioner had also made derogatory remarks, writing in filthy language against the teaching staff in the notice board and had allowed the students to read, which would establish that the petitioner is unfit to continue as the Principal of the Polytechnic Institute,” Justice M Duraiswamy said.
Also Read – Section 142(2) Of Negotiable Instruments Amendment Act, 2015 Is Constitutionally Valid: Madras HC [Read Judgment]
The court relied on the ruling in Avinash Nagra v. Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti & Ors., 1997 (2) SCC 534, whereby the Apex Court had made crucial observations with regards sexual harassment of students at college, specifically girl students, perpetrated by college staff.
In the said case, while upholding the order of dismissal of a post-graduate in Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya for sexually harassing a female student, the Supreme Court had remarked,
Also Read – Anticipatory Bail Can Be Granted In Cases Under SC/ST Atrocities Act : Madras HC [Read Order]
“The teacher who has been kept in charge, bears more added higher responsibility and should be more exemplary. His/her character and conduct should be more like Rishi and as loco parent is and such is the duty, responsibility and charge expected of a teacher.“

The court added that management of educational institutions was thrust with the responsibility of protecting and promoting girl child education, instead of letting hoodlums to rebuke it.
“It is axiomatic that percentage of education among girls, even after independence, is fatham deep due to indifference on the part of all in rural India except some educated people. Education to the girl children is nation’s asset and foundation for fertile human resources and disciplined family management, apart from their equal participation in socio-economic and political democracy. Only of late, some middle class people are sending the girl children to co-educational institutions under the care of proper management and to look after the welfare and safety of the girls. Therefore, greater responsibility is thrust on the management of the schools and colleges to protect the young children, in particular, the growing up girls, to bring them up in disciplined and dedicated pursuit of excellence,” the Supreme Court held.
In the present case, dismissing the Petitioner’s argument that the Respondent was not the appropriate authority to terminate him, the court noted that the Petitioner had himself at an earlier occasion admitted that the Respondent had appointed him and thus held that the Respondent was competent to terminate his services. The court also upheld the decision of the Respondent to reduce the Petitioner’s subsistence allowance during the period of suspension, as he was deliberately prolonging the matter.
Accordingly it held,

“The order of termination passed by the 1st respondent, which was also confirmed by the Appellate Authority, is proper. I do not find any error or irregularity in the order passed by the authorities. This writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed.“
Case Details:
Case Title: D Ganesan v. Chairman, Dharmapuri District Co-operative Sugar Mills Polytechnic & Anr.
Case No.: WP No. 37265/2004

Appearance: Advocate RP Narayan for Advocate M Saravana Kumar (for Petitioner); Advocate R Parthiban (for Respondent No. 1); Government Advocate S Suresh Kumar (for State)
Quorum: Justice M Duraiswamy
Click Here To Download Judgment

You may also like...