The Hindu : 'School cannot wash its hands of employee misconduct'

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Sunday, Feb 16, 2003

Southern States

Southern States - Tamil Nadu-Chennai

'School cannot wash its hands of employee misconduct'

By A. Subramani

CHENNAI FEB. 15. "A reading of the complaint, which narrates the horrifying experience of an innocent child at the hands of a beast in the guise of a human being, sends shock waves through this forum", a consumer court has said.

The forum was disposing of a complaint from the parents of three-and-half-year-old Laasya, doing LKG, explaining how the child was molested and bitten all over by a conductor in the school bus itself here.

While the management of the SBOA Matriculation Higher Secondary School, Anna Nagar, washed its hands of, saying it could not be held responsible for the acts of its employee, X metropolitan magistrate merely imposed a Rs. 1,000-fine on the culprit after he had confessed his crime!

But, the parents of Laasya — who had refused to travel by bus ever since the atrocity was committed on her on July 22, 1998 — moved the consumer court. The school having collected a transportation fee was vicariously liable for the acts of its employee and that its authorities were morally and legally responsible for the safety and security of children under their care, the parents pleaded.

The Chennai (North) Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum awarded Rs. 3 lakhs as compensation to the victim, in addition to refund of the fee paid to the SBOA Matriculation School, and reimbursement of the entire fee paid at the CSI Bain School, where Laasya was admitted after the incident.

Stating that the conductor, Mohanarangam, had chewed up the innocent child, a Bench comprising the president, K. Ramasamy, and the members V.M. Thandapani and Nagammai Karuppiah, said: "Any amount of compensation cannot be sufficient to console either the child or her parents".

According to the complainant, S.D. Manivannan, Laasya was crying in pain and agony after she returned from school on July 22, 1998. Her mother noticed bite marks and contusions all over the body.

To queries, Laasya kept saying `Conductor Anna' did it on her. When the incident was brought to the knowledge of school authorities, they asked him `to ignore it, in the interest of the institution'.

Pointing out that Laasya was crying and refusing to travel in any bus, Mr. Manivannan said the shock the incident produced on the child would take a long time to heal.

Holding the school authorities responsible for the fear and agony suffered by his child, he sought Rs. 3 lakhs as compensation.

Stating that the conductor was placed under suspension, the SBOA Matriculation School management maintained that it could not be held liable simply because he was its employee. It also attributed an ``ulterior motive'' to the parents in suing the school.

Rejecting this stance, the forum asked: "What ulterior motive can the parents of the innocent child, who for no fault of hers was subjected to physical and mental harassment, have against the school?" It was a settled law that for an act of an employee, the employer was liable vicariously, and education also came under the purview of the Consumer Protection Act. "Parents and school children are consumers", the forum said, citing a national commission ruling.

Concluding that the school had failed to discharge its moral and legal obligation, it directed the school to pay a total of Rs. 3,13,540 to Laasya's parents.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Southern States

Stories in this Section

'School cannot wash its hands of employee misconduct'

Lack of operators renders lifts unusable in GH

4 college students held

Mobile PCOs on long-distance trains, buses planned