Decided on February 06,1968

RAMAN NAIR P N Appellant


- (1.) THE petitioner while functioning as a permanent teacher in the Sakthi Vilasom High School, Edanad, was placed under suspension with effect from 6 February 1957 pending enquiry into a criminal case instituted against him by the police for offences punishable under Sections 417 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code. Although the case ended in a conviction before the District Magistrate's Court of Ernakulam, the petitioner was ultimately acquitted on appeal by the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Parur, dated 18 March 1960. In view of his having been so acquitted, he was directed to be reinstated in service by order dated 7 June 1961 passed by the District Educational Officer, Palai. Exhibit P. 2 is the certificate issued to the petitioner by the headmaster evidencing his reinstatement in service. Thus it would be seen that he was under suspension during the period from 6 February 1957 to 7 June 1961.
(2.) IT is necessary to mention that at the time when the order of suspension was passed, the school in question was governed by the P. S. S. Scheme under which there was no responsibility on the part of the State to disburse the salaries due to the teachers in such private schools. In between the date of suspension and that of reinstatement of the petitioner, the Kerala Education Act and Rules came into force with effect from 1 June 1959. Probably, it was on account of the control exercised by the departmental officers over such institutions under the new Act and Rules that the District Educational Officer, Palai, passed the order directing the reinstatement of the petitioner into service.
(3.) THE petitioner made an application to respondent 2, the Regional Deputy Director of Public Instruction, Ernakulam, requesting for the disbursement of his salary for the period, 6 February 1957 to 7 June 1961, during which, according to him, he had been wrongly placed under suspension. Exhibit P. 3 is a copy of this representation filed by the petitioner. The petitioner's grievance is that even though three years had elapsed since then, no action whatever had been taken by the department on this petition filed by him and no reply had been sent to him. He accordingly came forward with this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus compelling the respondents to disburse to him the salary which had accrued for the period during which he had been kept under suspension.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.