Brahmo Chellakootty

Introduction

Brahmo Chellakootty is a former teacher employed at Colchester Academy in Essex via First Class Education Agency, with earlier posts at South Essex College and Eastbury Community School, who was banned from teaching for life in November 2024 after a Teaching Regulation Agency panel found a pattern of inappropriate physical contact and comments toward pupils and a colleague spanning 2001 to 2019. Chellakootty, present at the hearing but not legally represented, denied the bulk of the allegations; the panel found multiple particulars proved across three institutions. Decision maker Marc Cavey prohibited him from teaching indefinitely with no entitlement ever to apply for restoration.

Background Information

Chellakootty built a long teaching career in England, with the proven conduct stretching across Eastbury Community School in 2017, South Essex College in 2018 and Colchester Academy between 2018 and 2019, where he worked via an agency before brief direct employment. At South Essex College, a colleague — Colleague A — told the panel he had asked her out for drinks several times despite refusals, and in June 2018, alone with her in a computer room, checked no one was looking, took her hand in both of his and asked, “You don’t mind if I hold your hand, do you?”, positioning himself between her and the only exit. At Colchester Academy, pupils Pupil N and Pupil O described hugs, a kiss on the cheek, comments including “my lovely”, remarks that a pupil was very mature for her age, promises of extra “positives” for staying back late, and a warning after a hug not to tell her mum and dad. He had also accepted a police caution in January 2016 for fraud by false representation after being found with a fake season ticket and several forged tickets.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Findings vs. facts. Chellakootty admitted only a handful of particulars; the panel found the rest proved on the balance of probabilities after a contested 11-day hearing. It expressly found his conduct was NOT sexually motivated — a finding that shaped but did not avoid the ban.

The panel found proved: the hand-taking with Colleague A; the kiss, prolonged hug and repeated hugs of Pupil N; touching Pupil O’s hand and arm, putting his elbow between her breasts while correcting her typing, and grazing her thigh; several of the comments toward both pupils; the application for a teaching role in October 2019 while on bail conditions prohibited him from entering school premises — with the panel finding that application dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people; and the 2016 fraud caution. Colleague A described the hand-holding as “quite unsavoury, embarrassing and rather creepy”, noting he waited until they were alone. Chellakootty attributed his conduct to his “social nature and South African heritage” and described one hug as like a “father and daughter” hug. The panel found the conduct did amount to unacceptable professional conduct and disrepute, but found no evidence his purpose was sexual, so the sexual-motivation allegation failed.

Public Reaction and Consequences

No press coverage attaches to the case; the published decision is the public record. The criminal allegations against Chellakootty arising from the Colchester Academy pupils did not result in a conviction in the published record, but the bail conditions in 2019 kept him off school premises — and his application for a teaching role during that bail became its own proven dishonesty. The panel noted his conduct formed a “consistent pattern of overfamiliar behaviour over a number of years in three different schools”, that he had faced prior proceedings, and that he still failed to recognise the duty to report incidents of concern, breaching safeguarding procedures consolidated over 18 years of teaching in England. It found a real risk of repetition and recommended no review period. Cavey agreed that a review period would be contrary to pupils’ best interests given his continued inability to grasp safeguarding requirements.

Current Status

Chellakootty is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. Because the decision maker also removed his entitlement to apply for restoration, the ban has no review gate: he “shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach”. The determination is dated 22 November 2024, with the order dated 27 November 2024, effective from service. He retains a right of appeal to the King’s Bench Division of the High Court within 28 days of notice; the published record shows none was filed. The 2016 fraud caution remains on his record independently of the teaching ban.

Impact on Their Career/Life

Chellakootty’s case shows the regulator’s reach beyond sexual-motivation findings: overfamiliarity, boundary-breaking and safeguarding failures — none found sexually motivated — still produced the no-review, no-restoration tier because the pattern persisted across three institutions and nearly two decades. The dishonesty finding attached not to the conduct itself but to his October 2019 job application while bailed away from school premises, which the panel treated as holding himself out as available for work he could not lawfully pursue. His defence — culture, social nature, accidental contact — was rejected against the consistency of witness accounts. For schools the case underlines that agency-supplied staff carry the same professional boundaries, and that a teacher who asks a colleague out repeatedly after refusals is already inside the misconduct framework.

Sources

• Dept for Education, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr Brahmo Chellakootty” — source