Judgment :- 1. The question that arises in this petition has been directly or indirectly the subject-matter of three decisions of this Court and the case has come up before us because of a reference order which has referred to two of those decisions, the one being in conflict with the other. The decisions are of Gopalan Nambiyar, J. in O. P. No. 1375 of 1968 and of Raghavan. J., as he then was, in O. P. No. 4293 of 1968. Indirectly, the view taken by Gopalan Nambiyar, J. has been accepted by a Division Bench of this Court in O. P. No.4276 of 1968 to which one of us was a party. The question is when a full time teacher is appointed under R.8 in Chapter XXIII of the Kerala Education Rules whether that full time teacher can be deputed for work in the upper primary section of a school where there is an upper primary section. It is not disputed that a teacher appointed under the Kerala Education Rules can be asked to work for periods up to 25 hours. No rule has been brought to our notice which inhibits such allocation of work that would entail working for 25 hours. We therefore think that a full time teacher appointed under R.8 in Chapter XXIII of the Kerala Education Rules can be asked to work in the upper primary section also when the total number of hours of work does bit exceed 25 hours. When the full time teacher in question appointed for the year 1969-70 in this case is accordingly allotted 25 hours of work (14 in the high school and 11 in the upper primary section),there will e only three hours of work left in the upper primary section. We do not think a teacher can be appointed for three hours of work in view of the proviso to R.7. But the submission of counsel for the petitioner is that a full time teacher should be appointed under R.8 and confined to the high school to do work for 14 hours, and another part time teacher should be appointed for the upper primary section to do the 14 hours work in the upper primary section. But the submission of counsel for the petitioner is that a full time teacher should be appointed under R.8 and confined to the high school to do work for 14 hours, and another part time teacher should be appointed for the upper primary section to do the 14 hours work in the upper primary section. Such an interpretation of the rules would mean that where under R.7 only a part time teacher should be appointed a full time teacher should be appointed and his work must be confined to hours below 15. This, we consider would be an unreasonable interpretation. This aspect was apparently not placed before Raghavan, J. as he then was, and with respect we are unable to agree with the view taken by the learned judge. We dismiss this writ petition. There will be no order as to costs. Dismissed.