T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Ribin K. A. , Physical Education Teacher – Appellant
Versus
District Educational Officer – Respondent
1. This Writ Petition was initially filed by the petitioner by challenging Exhibit P2 and P6 orders and thereafter the petitioner has sought to amend the Writ Petition by filing I.A.No.384/2012 by which Exhibit P9 order is also under challenge.
2. The matter in issue is only whether the petitioner is entitled for reinstatement in service in the light of the fact that the District Educational Officer did not pass an order within 15 days as contemplated under Rule 67(8)of Chapter XIV-A KER, granting permission for continued suspension.
3. The petitioner was functioning as a Physical Education Teacher under the 2nd respondent-Manager. The order of suspension is dated 29.11.2011, produced as Exhibit P2 herein, which was objected to by him as per Exhibit P3, submitted before the Manager and Exhibit P4 before the District Educational Officer. According to the petitioner, he was served with a notice Exhibit P6 by the Personal Assistant to the District Educational Officer proposing to conduct a preliminary enquiry on 14.12.2011 at 3 p.m. The petitioner filed this Writ Petition immediately thereafter pointing out that the period of suspension has expired on 13.12.2011 and till 13.1
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.