IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7519 of 2008 Between: K.Syed Faizuddin S./o. K. Syed Hussnubbin Teacher, Siddiqui Aided Urdu Ele School, Kondapeta, Banasanpally (Mandal) Kurnool District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The President, Siddiqui Aided Schools Committee, Sirvel, District Kurnool. 2 Head Master, Siddiqui Aided Urdu Ele School, Eidganagar, (Kondapeta), Banasanpally , Kurnool. 3 District Educational Officer, Kurnool. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to pass an order or orders direction or directions or issue a writ more particularly in the nature of writ of Certiorari calling the Records pertaining to the suspension order passed by the Respondent No.1 vide Rc No. 7/2008 dt. 13-3-2008 and declare the same as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14, 21 of the Constitution of India and against the mandatory provisions of Section 79(3) of A.P. Education Act and Rule 19 of A.P. Education Institutions Under Private Management Rules Pass any other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.CHANDRASEKHAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR EDUCATION The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner is appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher in Urdu in the Siddiqui Aided Schools, the first respondent herein. Vide orders, dated 13.03.2008, the first respondent placed the petitioner under suspension, on the ground that he was arrested on 29.02.2008 in relation to Crime No.18 of 2008 on the file of P.S. Nandikotkur and was released on bail on 11.03.2008. The petitioner is facing the trial in a case filed under Section 498-A of I.P.C., and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The petitioner contends that the allegations against him in the criminal case have nothing to do with his functioning, as Teacher and he cannot be continued under suspension any longer. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and learned Government Pleader for School Education for respondent No.3. The suspension of the petitioner is not on the allegation of any misconduct. He was placed under suspension, in view of his arrest in connection with Crime No.18 of 2008, on 29.02.2008. Further, the A.P. Private Educational Institutions Employees (Conduct) Rules, 1985, prohibit receipt of dowry, or bigamous the marriages, under Rules 17 and 18, respectively. It is not known as to whether the respondents have initiated any departmental action against the petitioner. Be that as it may, the petitioner can make a representation to the management of the school, which, in turn, shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders within a period of one month from the date of receipt of representation. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to make a representation, pointing out his grievance and as and when such representation is made, the first respondent shall pass appropriate orders thereon, within one month from the date of receipt of representation. It is, however, directed that the petitioner shall be paid subsistence allowance, in accordance with the relevant Rules. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ Dt.07.08.2008 L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J GJ