{"id":93323,"date":"2009-11-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009"},"modified":"2014-04-25T21:08:28","modified_gmt":"2014-04-25T15:38:28","slug":"m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"M.O.Sumithra vs Asst.Educational Officer on 18 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M.O.Sumithra vs Asst.Educational Officer on 18 November, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nOP.No. 29781 of 2000(U)\n\n\n\n1. M.O.SUMITHRA\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. ASST.EDUCATIONAL OFFICER\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.RAVINDRAN (SR.)\n\n                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN\n\n Dated :18\/11\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                          S. SIRI JAGAN, J\n                ...............................................\n                     O.P.No. 29781 of 2000\n               .................................................\n        Dated this the 18th day of November, 2009\n\n                          J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n<p>     The petitioner is the Manager of an aided school.                   He<\/p>\n<p>suspended two teachers of the school on different dates pending<\/p>\n<p>disciplinary action.     The educational authorities did not give<\/p>\n<p>permission to continue the suspension beyond 15 days for which<\/p>\n<p>the petitioner applied as required under Chapter XIV A of the<\/p>\n<p>KER. The petitioner filed two writ petitions namely OP Nos. 91<\/p>\n<p>of 1994 and 2228 of 1994 challenging the orders of the<\/p>\n<p>educational authorities. This court granted stay, on the strength<\/p>\n<p>of which, the teachers continued under suspension. Afterwards,<\/p>\n<p>according to the petitioner the teachers submitted apologies for<\/p>\n<p>their misconduct accepting which the Manager decided to drop<\/p>\n<p>the disciplinary proceedings against them.                     This fact was<\/p>\n<p>reported to this court. Accordingly, by Ext.P1 judgment dated<\/p>\n<p>28.9.1995, in respect of one employee this court passed the<\/p>\n<p>following order:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>             &#8220;When the matter came up for hearing today,<br \/>\n        counsels for the petitioner as well as the respondents<br \/>\n        submitted that the disciplinary proceedings initiated<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">O.P.No. 29781 of 2000              -2-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>        against the 2nd respondent has been withdrawn and that<br \/>\n        respondents 1 and 3 will disburse the salary and other<br \/>\n        benefits due to the second respondent.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>     2. In respect of the other employee, by Ext.P5 judgment<\/p>\n<p>the original petition was closed as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>               &#8220;When the matter came up for hearing counsel for<br \/>\n        the petitioner &#8211; Manager submitted that since second<br \/>\n        respondent has already retired from service, permission<br \/>\n        may be given for dropping the disciplinary proceedings<br \/>\n        initiated against the second respondent.     Counsel also<br \/>\n        submitted in view of the above said circumstances,<br \/>\n        petitioner is not interested in prosecuting this petition.<br \/>\n        Accordingly, counsel sought for permission to withdraw<br \/>\n        the OP. Original Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. It is<br \/>\n        made clear that all disciplinary proceedings initiated<br \/>\n        against the second respondent be allowed to be<br \/>\n        withdrawn.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>     3. Thereafter the teachers were reinstated. They were<\/p>\n<p>paid salary by the educational authorities also. Subsequently, in<\/p>\n<p>respect of in Ext.P1 judgment, the Assistant Educational Officer<\/p>\n<p>issued Ext.P3 directing the petitioner to remit the pay and<\/p>\n<p>allowances paid to the teacher, invoking powers under Rule 67<\/p>\n<p>(8) of Chapter XIV A of the KER. In respect of other teacher,<\/p>\n<p>Ext.P6 order has been issued to the same effect. Petitioner filed<\/p>\n<p>two appeals against the same as Exts.P4 and P7 before the<\/p>\n<p>Deputy Director of Education. By Ext.P11 order dated 7.8.1999,<\/p>\n<p>the Deputy Director informed the petitioner that since the<\/p>\n<p>Manager is bound to refund the pay and allowances paid to the<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">O.P.No. 29781 of 2000          -3-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>teachers for the period of suspension, the petitioner&#8217;s appeals<\/p>\n<p>deserve no consideration. While so, by Ext.P8, the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>was directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,28,752\/- towards recovery<\/p>\n<p>of the pay and allowances paid to the teachers for the period of<\/p>\n<p>suspension beyond 15 days. The petitioner is now challenging<\/p>\n<p>Exts.P3, P6 and P11 orders. Originally the O.P. was filed without<\/p>\n<p>challenging Ext.P11 order of rejection of the appeals.<\/p>\n<p>Subsequently the original petition was amended filing I.A. No.<\/p>\n<p>11689 of 2009 including a prayer for quashing Ext.P11 also.<\/p>\n<p>     4. The petitioner challenges the impugned orders on two<\/p>\n<p>grounds. The first is that before passing Exts.P6 and P3 orders,<\/p>\n<p>the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of being heard.<\/p>\n<p>The second is that in so far as the continued suspension of the<\/p>\n<p>teachers were as per orders passed by this court, on being prima<\/p>\n<p>facie satisfied that suspension is warranted on the basis of the<\/p>\n<p>charges against them, simply because subsequently the<\/p>\n<p>disciplinary proceedings were dropped accepting the apologies<\/p>\n<p>of the teachers, the educational authorities cannot recover from<\/p>\n<p>the petitioner the pay and allowances paid to the teachers for the<\/p>\n<p>period of suspension. The counsel for the petitioner pointed out<\/p>\n<p>that in Ext.P1 it is specifically directed that the Assistant<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">O.P.No. 29781 of 2000            -4-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Educational Officer and District Educational Officer will disburse<\/p>\n<p>the salary and other benefits due to the teacher. Although, in<\/p>\n<p>Ext.P5 judgment, a similar direction was not there, the<\/p>\n<p>educational authorities were aware of the continued suspension<\/p>\n<p>as per the orders of the court and therefore they cannot simply<\/p>\n<p>say that the suspension was unwarranted and therefore the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner is liable to refund the pay and allowances paid to the<\/p>\n<p>teacher for the period of suspension. The petitioner therefore<\/p>\n<p>submits that the action of the respondents in seeking to recover<\/p>\n<p>the pay and allowances paid to the teachers is totally<\/p>\n<p>unsustainable and liable to be quashed.\n<\/p>\n<p>      5. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 3rd respondent.<\/p>\n<p>According to the 3rd respondent, the educational authority<\/p>\n<p>rejected the request of the petitioner to allow him to continue<\/p>\n<p>the teachers under suspension being satisfied that the charges<\/p>\n<p>against the teachers do not warrant keeping them under<\/p>\n<p>continued suspension. Simply because the petitioner obtained<\/p>\n<p>interim orders from this court, that does not go to show that the<\/p>\n<p>suspensions were actually justified. The Government Pleader<\/p>\n<p>would submit that the very fact that teachers were reinstated<\/p>\n<p>accepting an apology would go to show that the charges did not<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">O.P.No. 29781 of 2000           -5-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>warrant keeping the teachers under continued suspension. The<\/p>\n<p>Government Pleader therefore would vehemently support the<\/p>\n<p>impugned orders.\n<\/p>\n<p>      6. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.<\/p>\n<p>      7. The petitioner has specifically contended in the writ<\/p>\n<p>petition that before issuing Exts.P3 and P6 orders the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>was not afforded an opportunity of being heard. Although in<\/p>\n<p>paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit it is stated that it is not true<\/p>\n<p>that no opportunity was given to the petitioner for hearing, it is<\/p>\n<p>not specifically stated anywhere that the petitioner was actually<\/p>\n<p>afforded and opportunity of being heard.\n<\/p>\n<p>      8. Exts.P3 and P6 orders do not refer to any notice to the<\/p>\n<p>Manager also. As such the Government pleader was not able to<\/p>\n<p>satisfy me that Exts.P3 and P6 orders were preceded by a notice<\/p>\n<p>and hearing. The contention of the learned Government Pleader<\/p>\n<p>is that Rule 67 of the Chapter XIV A of the KER do not<\/p>\n<p>contemplate a hearing. I am of opinion that even if such an<\/p>\n<p>opportunity is not provided for in the Rules, such an opportunity<\/p>\n<p>should be read into the rules since recovery of an amount of<\/p>\n<p>more than Rs.1 lakh is certainly an action affecting the civil<\/p>\n<p>rights of the petitioner. An action visiting the petitioner with<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">O.P.No. 29781 of 2000            -6-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>such serious consequences cannot be taken without complying<\/p>\n<p>with the principles of natural justice, the primary requirement of<\/p>\n<p>which is a hearing. It is very clear that Exts.P3 and P6 orders<\/p>\n<p>have been issued without affording an opportunity of being<\/p>\n<p>heard to the petitioner. Exts.P3 and P6 orders are liable to be<\/p>\n<p>quashed on that ground alone.\n<\/p>\n<p>      9.   Apart from that it is not as if the petitioner had<\/p>\n<p>suspended the teachers without any reason whatsoever.<\/p>\n<p>Although the educational authorities did not give sanction for<\/p>\n<p>continuing the teachers under suspension, this court found a<\/p>\n<p>prima facie case for such continued suspension of the teachers.<\/p>\n<p>There was no final adjudication of the question of validity of such<\/p>\n<p>suspension, in so far as the teachers have tendered apology for<\/p>\n<p>their misconducts and they were reinstated in service. At least,<\/p>\n<p>in Ext.P1 judgment, there is a direction that the educational<\/p>\n<p>authorities would disburse the salary and other benefits due to<\/p>\n<p>the teacher. The educational authorities were parties to the writ<\/p>\n<p>petition. They did not object to the same. They also did not seek<\/p>\n<p>a direction to permit them to recover the amount from the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner. Without that, it is too late in the day to contend that<\/p>\n<p>the educational authorities are entitled to recover the salary paid<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">O.P.No. 29781 of 2000             -7-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>to the teacher for the period of suspension. Of course, in Ext.P5<\/p>\n<p>judgment, there is no similar observation. This Court allowed the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner to continue the teacher under suspension. Since the<\/p>\n<p>teacher had retired from service the petitioner dropped the<\/p>\n<p>disciplinary proceedings and therefore the original petition was<\/p>\n<p>dismissed as withdrawn. There was also no consideration of the<\/p>\n<p>matter on merits. In that writ petition also, the DEO was a party.<\/p>\n<p>Before this court, he could have insisted for on a direction to the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner to pay the salary for the period of suspension. He did<\/p>\n<p>not choose to do so. In the above circumstances, I do not think<\/p>\n<p>that Exts.P3 and P6 orders are sustainable. Accordingly they are<\/p>\n<p>quashed.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The original petition is allowed as above.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>                                        S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE<br \/>\nrhs<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court M.O.Sumithra vs Asst.Educational Officer on 18 November, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM OP.No. 29781 of 2000(U) 1. M.O.SUMITHRA &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. ASST.EDUCATIONAL OFFICER &#8230; Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.P.RAVINDRAN (SR.) For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER The Hon&#8217;ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN Dated :18\/11\/2009 O R D E R S. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-93323","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>M.O.Sumithra vs Asst.Educational Officer on 18 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M.O.Sumithra vs Asst.Educational Officer on 18 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-11-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-04-25T15:38:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M.O.Sumithra vs Asst.Educational Officer on 18 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-04-25T15:38:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1426,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009\",\"name\":\"M.O.Sumithra vs Asst.Educational Officer on 18 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-04-25T15:38:28+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M.O.Sumithra vs Asst.Educational Officer on 18 November, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"M.O.Sumithra vs Asst.Educational Officer on 18 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M.O.Sumithra vs Asst.Educational Officer on 18 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-04-25T15:38:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M.O.Sumithra vs Asst.Educational Officer on 18 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-04-25T15:38:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009"},"wordCount":1426,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009","name":"M.O.Sumithra vs Asst.Educational Officer on 18 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-04-25T15:38:28+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-o-sumithra-vs-asst-educational-officer-on-18-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M.O.Sumithra vs Asst.Educational Officer on 18 November, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93323","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=93323"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93323\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=93323"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=93323"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=93323"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}