KAMMARAN GURUKKAL Vs. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE scope of interference by officers of the Department of Education in the matter of a suspension pending enquiry of a teacher of an Aided School made by the Manager of the school arises for consideration in this Original Petition.The petitioner is the Manager of Azhikode South U.P.School of which the 2nd respondent is the Headmaster.By Ext.P -1 order dated 28th November 1973 the petitioner suspended the 2nd respondent pending enquiry into certain charges against him.It is stated in Ext.P -1 that the suspension will be for a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of Ext.P -1 and the case of the respondents is that the 2nd respondent received Ext.P -1 only on 14th December 1973.Ext.P -1 suspension was pending enquiry into certain charges against the 2nd respondent.It seems one P.N.Sukumaran,Executive Committee Member,District Athletic Association,Cannanore submitted a complaint to the 1st respondent Assistant Educational Officer,Pappinisseri with a copy to the petitioner.As per the above complaint,the 2 nd respondent Headmaster certified as correct the date of birth of a pupil by name K.B.Basheer studying in Standard VII of the school and the date shown in that certificate was not the correct date of birth of that pupil.Moreover,on the strength of that certificate the pupil was able to compete in the sub -junior section of the Sports Meet held at the Baliapattom Panchayat ground on the 8th and 9th November 1973.Though as per his correct date of birth the said Basheer was not eligible to compete in the sub -junior section of the Sports Meet as he was not within the required age group,because of the false certificate given by the 2nd respondent the said pupil got an entrance to the sub -junior section and easily got the championship.The case of the petitioner is that on receipt of the above complaint on 23rd November 1973 at 4 p.m.the petitioner went to the school and asked the 2nd respondent to produce the school admission register and also the copy of the list of competitors sent up from the school for the said Sports Meet.According to the petitioner,the 2nd respondent not only did not comply with that request but he conducted himself in a manner most unbecoming of a teacher.It was under the above circumstances that Ext.P -1 suspension order pending enquiry was issued.

(2.) SUBSEQUENTLY ,the petitioner issued Ext.P -2 charge memo and the statement of allegations.The petitioner also reported the matter to the 1st respondent as per Ext.P -3 letter dated 23th November 1973.The 1st respondent thereupon conducted a preliminary investigation as required under rule 67(8)of Chapter XIV(A)of the Kerala Education Rules,1959 on 20th December 1973 and by Ext.P -4 order dated 26th December 1973 directed the petitioner to reinstate the 2nd respondent forthwith.It is against Ext.P -4 order that the petitioner has approached this Court by this Original Petition.

(3.) THE power to suspend an Aided School Teacher is governed by section 12(2)of the Kerala Education Act,195a and rule 67 of Chapter XIV(A)of the Kerala Education Rules,1959.Section 12(2)reads: