Chennai: The Madras high court has quashed an order of the school education department, removing the then District Educational Officer from service, who was found guilty in the Kumbakonam school fire accident, in which 94 children died.
Emphasising the importance of providing safeguards to school children, Justice M.V. Muralidaran has directed the government to direct the officials concerned to conduct surprise checks in all schools and verify whether the facilities provided in the schools are complying with the rules and regulations or not and in the event of non-compliance, the government shall initiate severe action against the violating schools. “The authorities, school management and teachers shall at all times ensure the safety of the young and tender children”, the judge added.
The judge said every school management, whether government, aided or private, should provide adequate safeguards and ensure that the roof under which they provide the service of imparting education to young children should be a safe place without any potential hazards. If the same is ensured in every school all over this country, then access to education to young children would be made much better and safer, the judge added and gave the above directive, while allowing a petition from P. Pinagapani.
According to the petitioner, while he was working as headmaster of a government higher secondary school, he was also given the additional responsibility of DEO, Thanjavur from October 25, 2002, to January 6, 2004.
Thereafter he was relieved of the additional charge. After 6 months, there was a huge fire accident occurred on school premises in Kumbakonam, in which 94 children died. As a result of the investigation by the one-man commission, several persons were identified to be responsible for the said accident. As a result of which, the government framed charges against him and he gave a reply. However, the enquiry officer found him guilty and disciplinary authority accepted the finding and removed him from service. He was singled out and other similarly placed officials were exonerated, he added.
The judge said the petitioner has been found guilty whereas 5 persons who were working along with him at the relevant point of time when the accident took place were exonerated, but the petitioner alone has been found guilty without any satisfactory reason being available for exonerating these individuals. Apart from this, it could be evidently seen from the counter affidavit that the disciplinary proceedings were initiated only at the behest of the report submitted by Justice K. Sampath Commission of Enquiry. As rightly pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner that the Supreme Court has clearly laid down that though it might be open to the disciplinary authority to deal differently with different delinquents, however, once when the charges were similar and in relation to the same incident, the same would amount to discrimination if only one delinquent was singled out and several others who could have been equally responsible for the same have been exonerated without any sufficient material basis, the judge added.
The judge said the recognition that was granted to the institution in which the accident took place was also granted by the erstwhile CEO, who has functioned till the year 2002. Further, once when it has been made clear that the charge memo was issued only after the Justice Sampath Commission of Enquiry report, it would make it clear that it was only an afterthought and in order to just project as if there has been some stern action taken, has the petitioner was arbitrarily proceeded against.
This would demonstrate that the government has not made any independent application of mind in issuing the charge memo, the judge added.
