In a batch of petitions filed by the teachers against whom action had been taken by the District Educational Officer for having been involved in a protest, the Madras High Court held that the right of the petitioners as members of a Teachers Federation was an unrestricted right to protest peacefully without arms as guaranteed under Constitution.
“To be more specific Article 19(1)(b) confers the right to the petitioners to assemble and protest peacefully without arms and such a right is the significant feature of a democratic country likewise ours,” said the bench of Justice L. Victoria Gowri.
While putting emphasis on the right to protest, the bench said it is an inherent part of speech and a facet of the right to live guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Thus, the bench held that “constraining the space for legitimate dissent arbitrarily by suspending the petitioners and issuing them with charge memos under Rule 17(b) of Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, scuttling down the democratic value system guaranteed by our Constitution had to be undermined with iron hands”.
The petitioners— Secondary Grade Teachers working in various Panchayat Primary Union and Middle Schools in various Unions of Karur District— had approached the high court challenging the charge memos issued by the District Educational Officer to them alleging that they caused disturbance to the government servants due to their protest in front of the campus of Government Boys Higher Secondary School.
The petitioner teachers were members of the Tamil Nadu Primary School Teachers Federation who claimed they had merely protested against the irregularities committed by the department in finalising a seniority list of Secondary Grade Teachers and they had conducted a “Waiting Agitation” in front of office of the District Educational Office, Kulithalai, which was 350 m away from the said school.
The petitioners argued that the charge memos lacked proper consideration and were illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
The high court noted that though the authorities claimed that the protest caused a law-and-order problem but provided no evidence of police intervention or criminal complaints against the petitioners.
While emphasising the fundamental right of the petitioners to peacefully demonstrate against the department’s misuse of power, the court observed that the charge memos were issued without scrupulously following the guidelines.
The court said, “Since dialogue, dissent and deliberation are imperative in a democracy, the right to demonstrate by the petitioners, on behalf of the Teachers Federation against the arbitrary exercise of power by the respondents for suspending one of the members of Teachers Federation is protected under Article 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) of Constitution of India”.
Moreover, it noted the department’s initial suspension and subsequent reinstatement of the teachers, stating that charge memos issued afterward lacked proper consideration and deviated from state government guidelines. Consequently, the court quashed the proceedings against the teachers.
Comments
0 comment