NARAYANAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON 19-11-1969 the petitioner who was a Head Master of a Lower Primary School was kept under suspension pending enquiry by Ext. Pi order of the Manager the 2nd respondent. For various reasons the enquiry dragged on till 14-1-1970 when Ext. P2 order was passed by the Manager imposing upon the punishment or compulsory retirement as provided under R. 65 (5) (V ). In the mean-time, that is on 25-5-1973 the petitioner retired. Consequently this Court in O. P. No. 2590 of 1975 accepted the petitioner's challenge against Ext. P2, and it was accordingly set aside.

(2.) ON 12-10-1976 by Ext. P5 the Manager ordered that the period of suspension between 19-11-1969 and 25-5-1973 was to be treated as eligible leave. Contending that the petitioner was entitled to full salary for the period of suspension, he challenged Ext. P5 before the Government by means of revision. The Government by the impugned order, Ext. P6 dated 19-4-1977 , upheld the order of the Manager. The reason for so doing is apparently R. 91 of Chapter XIV-A of the KER which refers to R. 56 (1) of Part 1 of the KSR. If the latter provision was applicable the petitioner's contention was rightly rejected. The question is does it.

(3.) THESE legislative lacunae cannot be filled up by judicial interpretation if such interpretation would affect civil rights. The rule-making authority has left the rule short of the present requirement. Whether the omission was intended or otherwise, the omission must go to the benefit of the petitioner. In the circumstances 1 declare that the petitioner is entitled to full salary for the period of suspension between 19-11-1969 and the date of retirement, i. e. , 25-5-1973. The O. P. is allowed in the above terms. No costs. Allowed. . .