she left a voicemail saying she had a temperature
A teacher who “called in sick with a temperature” during the coronavirus pandemic before boarding a flight to India has avoided a ban.
Anita Sawhney, formerly employed at the now-closed Midpoint Centre in Wolverhampton, failed to disclose a negative private Covid test result.
The school only discovered she had left the UK when her return flight was significantly delayed.
A professional conduct panel met earlier in March 2025 to consider her case. The findings were published on March 28.
The panel accused Ms Sawhney of “unacceptable professional conduct”.
Flights between London Heathrow and Delhi were booked for Ms Sawhney and her partner on October 17, 2020. They were set to depart on October 22 and return on October 31.
Ms Sawhney took a private Covid test at 4:45 pm on October 20, which returned negative the next day.
However, she reported a raised temperature at the end of the school day on October 21.
The school told her to leave immediately and take a Covid test but she did not mention that she had already taken one the previous day.
On October 22, she left a voicemail saying she had a temperature and would not be coming in.
On October 29, she called a colleague, referred to as Witness B, and revealed she was in India. She said a family issue had delayed her return until November 11.
The school referred the matter to the Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) on February 16, 2021.
The panel found she attended work between October 19 and 21 while experiencing a potential Covid symptom.
Ms Sawhney denied this, saying she did not think disclosure was necessary after testing negative.
The panel ruled against the teacher, stating that guidance at the time required self-isolation if experiencing a raised temperature.
Ms Sawhney admitted to misleading the school about her absence and failing to correct any misunderstanding.
She also admitted she had “failed to act with integrity”. The panel said there was a “breach of guidance in order to facilitate a trip to India” and a “lack of openness and transparency”.
Despite this, the panel acknowledged her “lengthy and unblemished career”. It noted she had “devoted years to working as a teacher” and had been working with “particularly challenging pupils in exceptionally challenging environments”.
She demonstrated “some insight and remorse”, admitting she “could have done things in a different way”.
The panel decided against recommending a prohibition order.
The findings stated: “Given that the nature and severity of the behaviour were at the less serious end of the possible spectrum… a prohibition order would not be appropriate in this case.”
Sarah Buxcey, who made the final decision on behalf of the Secretary of State, agreed:
“I have concluded that a prohibition order is not proportionate or in the public interest.
“I consider that the publication of the findings made would be sufficient to send an appropriate message to the teacher as to the standards of behaviour that were not acceptable and that the publication would meet the public interest requirement of declaring proper standards of the profession.”
Loading ...