The school management is bound to implement the order of the competent authority declining approval for termination of services and to pay the appellant's emoluments for the period beyond the expiry of four months.

.1. The above writ appeal has been filed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 4. 1995 in W.P.No.10311 of 1994, whereunder the writ petition filed by the appellant, seeking for a writ of mandamus to implement the orders of the 2nd respondent in Rc.No.22945/A2/92 dated 24. 1994 and to reinstate the appellant as teacher in the 3rd respondent school with all backwages payable to the appellant during the period of suspension, come to be dismissed.

2. The relevant facts are that the petitioner was working as a School Assistant in the 3rd respondent School; that she is a daughter of the Correspondent of the 3rd respondent School and also the sister of the Head Master of the said school; that owing to certain personal and family disputes a suit for partition in O.S. No.103 of 1991 came to be filed on the file of the District Munsif, Tuticorin by the appellant and that the same was decreed in her favour. The defendant in that suit appears to have filed an appeal in A.S.No.62 of 1992 on the file of the Sub Court, Tutucorin and the same is said to be pending. According to the appellant, enraged at this and for no fault of the appellant by proceedings dated 112. 1992 the appellant was placed under suspension with effect from 112. 1992, pending framing of charges. Thereafter, charges were said to have been framed and the appellant also submitted her explanation. An enquiry was said to have been conducted and as a consequence of the same, the 3rd respondent appears to have submitted proposals for prior approval of the 2nd respondent for terminating the services of the petitioner from the School even before the expiry of four months of the period of suspension. According to the 3rd respondent no orders have been passed thereon and the 2nd respondent was adopting silent attitude. At that stage; the 3rd respondent school appears to have wrote a letter to the 2nd respondent on 14. 1993 surrendering the secondary grade post held by the appellant in the 3rd respondent school along with her services with effect from 14. 1993 and requesting the 2nd respondent to resume the post by virtue of the powers delegated in G.O.Ms.No.1664 Edn dated 6. 1978 so that posting may be given to the appellant in some other needy school. The appellant has also been representing to the 2nd respondent complaining about the nondisbursal of the subsistence allowance and also the circumstances in which the appellant was being harassed by the 3rd respondent School.

.3. The appellant also appears to have filed earlier W.P.No.3215 of 1994, challenging the order of suspension dated 112. 1992 on the ground that the appellant cannot be kept under suspension for a period of four months in view of Sec.22 (3) of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools Regulation Act, 1973, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’. By an order dated 22. 1994, Bakthavatsalam, J., after hearing the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant at that time and also the learned Additional Governme nt Pleader, issued a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to consider and dispose of the representations said to have been given by the appellant in June, 1993 and January, 1994 on merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Thereupon, the 2nd respondent has passed an order in Rc.No.22945/92 dated 24. 1994, declining approval on the request made by the 3rd respondent for terminating the services of the appellant with a consequential direction to forthwith reinstate the appellant in service. The various irregularities in the proceedings submitted with a request for approval by the 3rd respondent has been pointed out in the said proceedings dated 24. 1994 by the 2nd respondent in justification for the rejection of the request for approval. Since in spite of letters dated 5. 1994 and 15. 1994 by the appellant to the 3rd respondent, inviting the attention of the 3rd respondent to the orders of the 2nd respondent and for all