Judgment :- C.S. Rajan, J. The petitioner challenges Ext. P-7 order of suspension. The reasons for suspending the petitioner as mentioned in Ext. P-7 are as follows: The Government issued order dated 12.3.1987 insisting that all the official correspondence must be in Malayalam. The petitioner was requested repeatedly by the Head of the Department to follow the above instructions. But the petitioner was raising untenable objections against the above instructions and he was not prepared to correspond in Malayalam. Therefore, the petitioner was requested to appear for a personal hearing in order to understand personally from him the difficulties which he was experiencing in the matter of correspondence in Malayalam. But he did not appear for the personal hearing. Thereafter he was requested to explain in writing. In his explanation, he has raised the same arguments against the implementation of Malayalam as official language. Therefore, the petitioner was suspended pending enquiry into the allegations of insubordination, misconduct and defiance of the orders of the superior authorities. 2. The petitioner's main argument is that he is not bound to implement the order of the Government to correspond in Malayalam. According to him, neither the Constitution nor the law made by the Legislature empowers the Government to make Malayalam as the only official language. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on Art.345 of the Constitution of India which reads as follows: "345. Official language or languages of a State.- Subject to the provisions of Art.346 and 347, the Legislature of a State may by law adopt any one or more ofthe languages in use in the State or Hindi as the language or languages to be used for all or any of the official purposes of that State: Provided that until the Legislature of the State otherwise provides by law, the English language shall continue to be used for those official purposes with in the State for which it was being used immediately before the commencement of this Constitution." Under the above Article the State Legislature has passed the Kerala Official Languages Legislation Act, 1969 which was amended in 1973. S.1-A of the above Act makes both Malayalam and English as the Languages which can be used for official purposes. Under S.1-B the Government is empowered to issue notification for using Malayalam or English as the Language to be used for the official purposes. 3. Ext. S.1-A of the above Act makes both Malayalam and English as the Languages which can be used for official purposes. Under S.1-B the Government is empowered to issue notification for using Malayalam or English as the Language to be used for the official purposes. 3. Ext. P-8 is a notification issued on 11.10.1989. By the above notification the Government enumerated various departments in which Malayalam alone can be used for correspondence with effect from 1.11.1989. The petitioner's department is one among them. Ext. P-8 notification also exempts the use of Malayalam wherein English language has to be used legally and also wherein Tamil and Kannada have to be used for the interest of minorities. 4. According to the learned counsel, both the Act and Ext. P-8 notification allows an officer to use both English and Malayalam. I do not think the above interpretation is legally correct. There need not be any legislation for continuing the usage of English for official purposes, because the proviso to Art.345 stipulates that until the Legislature of the State otherwise provides by law, the English language shall continue to be used for those official purposes within the State for which it was being used immediately before the commencement of the Constitution. The proviso empowers the State Legislature to enact the law for the purpose of using as official language other than English and Hindi. Hindi has been mentioned as the Official Language in the main provision in Art.345. Therefore, the Legislature has to step in by making appropriate legislation only in cases where the State wants to make any other language other than English and Hindi as official language. Therefore, the petitioner's argument that in spite of the Kerala Official Languages Legislation Act and Ext. P-8 notification, English can still be used is not correct. The petitioner's conduct in not complying with the directions contained in the Government orders issued in pursuance to Ext. P-8 notification is not in good taste. 5. The petitioner as a duty bound Government servant is bound to obey the orders of the superior officers which are quite consistent with the law of the land. It is not a case where the superior officers issued instructions without any jurisdiction or inconsistent with any of the law or of the Constitution as wrongly contended by the petitioner. 5. The petitioner as a duty bound Government servant is bound to obey the orders of the superior officers which are quite consistent with the law of the land. It is not a case where the superior officers issued instructions without any jurisdiction or inconsistent with any of the law or of the Constitution as wrongly contended by the petitioner. When the Government takes a policy decision to use Malayalam as official language and in that direction takes necessary steps for the use of Malayalam Language in certain departments, the petitioner cannot contend that he is not bound by such a decision. If such a argument is accepted as correct, every officer will be justified in defying the instructions of the superior officers stating that the policy decision of the Government is wrong or unsustainable. The petitioner cannot act in such a manner derogatory of his status as a government servant. Under these circumstances, I do not find any justification to interfere with Ext. P-7 order of suspension. The Original Petition is, therefore, dismissed.