Should not the Manager of an aided school be heard while cancelling the permission earlier granted to place a teacher under suspension for a continuous period exceeding 15 days pending disciplinary proceedings ?

2. The Manager of an aided school placed a teacher under suspension contemplating disciplinary action by order dated 14.10.2015 in terms of Rule 67(1)(a) of Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Education Rules, 1959 (the 'KER' for short). The Manager who could place the teacher under suspension for a continuous period not exceeding 15 days sought permission of the Assistant Educational Officer to continue the same. The Assistant Educational Officer found on preliminary investigation that there are valid grounds for suspension and granted permission to the Manager to continue the suspension as sought. The said order of the Assistant Educational Officer dated 27.10.2015 was in accordance with Rule 67(8) of Chapter XIV A KER which was ofcourse open to review by himself or by a higher authority. The teacher later applied for review of the permission so granted by preferring a petition dated 03.01.2016 to the Assistant Educational Officer which was made over to the District Educational Officer.

3. The District Educational Officer by order dated 12.04.2016 has reviewed the order of the Assistant Educational Officer thus revoking the permission and directing the teacher to be reinstated in service. The teacher has filed W.P.(C). No. 9830/2016 seeking reinstatement in service and the Manager has filed W.P.(C). No. 17452/2016 challenging the order directing reinstatement in service after revoking the suspension. The teacher contends that the order of suspension is ill motivated and that the Manager is obliged to reinstate him in service without prejudice to the disciplinary proceedings pending. The Manager on the other hand contends that the District Educational Officer has passed the order on review cancelling the permission granted earlier to continue the suspension without notice and behind his back.

4. The misdemeanor alleged against the teacher is that he willfully drove his Motor Cycle and parked the same inside the class room to express resentment over the direction of the Headmistress to park vehicles outside the school compound. There is also an allegation that the teacher later trespassed into the house of the Manager and assaulted him and his wife leading to the registration of a crime under Sections 341, 323, 324, 448 and 506(II) of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted by either parties that the investigation by the police is complete and the case is pending trial on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Pattambi.

5. I heard Mr. U. Balagangadharan, Advocate on behalf of the teacher, Mr. K.R. Ganesh, Advocate on behalf of the Manager as well as Mr. M.R. Arunkumar Karanavar, Government Pleader.

6. A teacher could be placed under suspension by the Manager for a continuous period not exceeding 15 days without the previous sanction of the Educational Officer as per the proviso to Rule 67(7) of Chapter XIV A KER. The Educational Officer can grant permission to the Manager to place the teacher under suspension for a period beyond 15 days if necessary if it is found on investigation that there are valid grounds. This is discernible from Rule 67(8) of Chapter XIV A KER and the Educational Officer is obliged to pass orders either way within 15 days of the period of suspension. It is open to the Educational Officer to either permit the Manager to place the teacher under suspension beyond 15 days or refuse permission and direct the teacher to be reinstated in service. The order so passed by the Assistant Educational Officer in the instant case is open to review either suo motu or on motion by aggrieved as explicit from Rule 67(8A) of Chapter XIV A KER.

7. Rule 67(8A) of Chapter XIV A KER is extracted hereunder:

R.67(8A)- Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (8) the authority who permitted th