The petitioner is an Upper Division Clerk in the Pallikkunnu Grama Panchayat. While so, under Ext.P1, the president of the Panchayat, 1st respondent herein, suspended the petitioner in exercise of his powers under Rule 8 of the kerala Panchayat Raj (Control over officers) Rules 1997 {for short ‘the Rules’}. Ext.P1 order is dated 23.2008. Ext.P1 is challenged in this writ petition.

2. The petitioner contends that, in terms of the provisions of the Panchayat Raj Act {hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’} and the Rules made thereunder, Ext.P1 order of suspension will continue to be operative only if it is placed before the Panchayat Committee at its next meeting held by the Panchayat, after the order of suspension and it is ratified by the Panchayat Committee as such. It is

common case that Ext.P1 order was placed by the President of the Panchayat before the Panchayat Committee in the next meeting held after Ext.P1 Viz., 10.6.2008. It is also on record that the suspension of the petitioner was discussed by the Panchayat Committee in its meeting held on 10.6.2008. But, apparently, the Panchayat Committee in it meeting held on 10.6.2008 did not take a decision to ratify the suspension and on the said premise, it is contended by the petitioner that Ext.P1 order of suspension should be deemed to have been cancelled, by operation of law. Apparently, the suspension was ratified by the Panchayat Committee in its next meeting on 26.2008. But the question is whether the statue contemplates that an order of suspension of an employee of the Panchayat common service, below the gazetted rank, issued by the President of the Panchayat, in terms of the provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder, requires to be ratified by the Panchayat Committee, for its continued operation, in the next meeting of the Panchayat held after the order of suspension is issued.

3. Counsel on both sides have not argued on the merits of the order of suspension as such, but only made submissions on the provisions of the law, which authorizes the President to issue an order of suspension and which also deals with the validity of the order of suspension and the requirement of approval by the Panchayat Committee as such.

4. Section 156 of the Act deals with the powers of the President and Vice President. Section 156(6)

(b) of the said Act reads as follows:

“(6) The president of the panchayat shall also have the following powers, namely:--

.(b) Suspend from service, if necessary, any employee or officer under the control of the panchayat other than the secretary and the Government officers in the Gazetted officers in the gazetted rank who are transferred to the service of the panchayat, when disciplinary proceeding are to be taken against them for dereliction of duty or insubordination or for violation of rules or standing orders:

Provided that the President shall place the order of suspension in the next meeting of the panchayat and get it ratified; otherwise the said order will become invalid”

.5. It is apposite that the Subordinate Rules are relevant for the purpose of Section 156 of the Act are also referred to. Rule 8 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (control Over Officers) Rule 1997 reads as follows:

.“8. (1) If the president is prima facie satisfied that an employee of the Panchayat referred to in Section 180, a Government Officer or employee of subordinate service whose service has been lent to the Panchayat, has committed an offence of serious nature, includes misconduct or deserves major penalty, and allowing him to continue in service is against public interest and will obstruct the enquiry being conducted or intending to conduct against him, he may suspend such employee from service subject to detailed enquiry and disciplinary proceeding.”

6. Since the provisions of the Act authorities the President of the Panchayat to suspend an employee of the Panchayat, under the control of the panchayat, when disciplinary proceedings are to be taken again