V. V. S. RAO, J. ( 1 ) IN both these writ petitions, the petitioners, are working as non-teaching staff members of a private educational institution under the same management. They were suspended by two different orders dated 17-4-2000 and 15-4-2000 respectively by the management in connection with a crime registered as Crime no. 116 of 2000 of II Town Police Station, eluru. The suspension order was subsequently extended by the management after obtaining necessary permission of the competent authority till such time the police case registered against the petitioners is finalised. Aggrieved by the suspension until the finalisation of police case, the petitioners have approached this Court. ( 2 ) THE learned Counsel for the petitioners in both the writ petitions, sri P. Satyanarayana submits that extension of suspension till finalisation of the criminal case is contrary to sub-section (3) of section 79 of the Andhra Pradesh Education, act, 1982 (hereinafter called the Act ). The learned Government Pleader for Higher education, Sri Satyanarayana Prasad submits that as per the proviso to sub-section (3), reading it as a whole, if the enquiry "is not started and completed" initially for a period of two months and even after further extended period of two months, a deeming provision comes into operation. By virtue of the deeming provision, the private educational institution is at option either to allow the suspended employee to work as an employee or deeming him as an employee, give the benefits attached to the post without allowing him to work in the institution. He also relied on a judgment of this Court in T. Inna Reddy vs. District educational Officer, Hyderabad. ( 3 ) SUB-SECTION (3) of Section 79 of the Act reads as under:"section 79: dismissal, removal or reduction in rank or suspension etc. , of employees of private institutions: (3) (a) No employee shall be placed under suspension except when an enquiry into the gross misconduct of such employee is contemplated. ( 3 ) SUB-SECTION (3) of Section 79 of the Act reads as under:"section 79: dismissal, removal or reduction in rank or suspension etc. , of employees of private institutions: (3) (a) No employee shall be placed under suspension except when an enquiry into the gross misconduct of such employee is contemplated. (b) No such suspension shall remain in force for more than a period of two months from the date of suspension and if such inquiry is not started and completed within that period, such employee shall, without prejudice to the inquiry, be deemed to have been restored as employee: provided that the competent authority may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, extend the said period of two months for a further period not exceeding two months, if in the opinion of such competent authority the inquiry could not be completed within the said period of two months for reasons directly attributable to such employee" ( 4 ) SUB-SECTION (4) of Section 79 lays down that every such employee placed under suspension under sub-section (3) shall be paid subsistence allowance at such rates as may be prescribed during the period of his suspension. ( 5 ) A reading of clauses (a) and (b) of sub-section (3) makes it clear that: (I) An employee can be placed under suspension only when an enquiry is contemplated into the gross misconduct; (ii) An employee can be placed under suspension only for a period of two months from the date of suspension and the enquiry has to be "started and completed" within a period of two months; (iii) The competent authority, at the request of the management of the private educational institution and for the reasons to be recorded in writing may extend the period of suspension for a further period not exceeding two months subject to the condition that the delay is directly due to the suspended employee; (iv) Even after the extended period of two months, the enquiry "is not started" the employee "shall be deemed to have been restored as employee. " ( 6 ) THE effect of the deeming provision would certainly be not continuing the employee under suspension by paying the full salary. It cannot be treated as suspension with full salary or subsistence allowance as contemplated under sub-section (4) of Section 79. " ( 6 ) THE effect of the deeming provision would certainly be not continuing the employee under suspension by paying the full salary. It cannot be treated as suspension with full salary or subsistence allowance as contemplated under sub-section (4) of Section 79. As it is well settled that a deeming provision cannot be used to take away the operation of the main provision, a reasonable interpretation would be that after the expiry of total four months period of suspension, both by virtue of operation of clause (b) of sub-section (3) of Section 79 as well as the proviso to sub-section (3), the employer/management, may treat the employee as a restored/reinstated employee and may either allow him to work in his post or so as to satisfy the deeming provision, allow him to draw the emoluments which would certainly be not subsistence allowance under sub-section (4) of Section 79 of the Act. By interpreting the deeming provision in the manner hereinabove, the incongruities and vague areas in the operation of the provision can be avoided. One such area is where the employee is involved in a criminal case and by operation of law he shall be deemed to be under suspension till finalisation of the criminal case. Secondly if the enquiry is started within the period of two months, but could not be completed either within the initial period of two months or extended period of another two months. In a given case, it is always possible to contend that the non-completion of enquiry by itself would not enure to the benefit of the employee by virtue of the deeming provision. They are only illustrative instances and there could be number of situations where the very purpose of sub-sections (3) and (4) would be rendered ineffective. Therefore, it is proper to interpret clause (b) of sub-section (3) of Section 79 and the proviso as giving an option to the management either to reinstate the employee and allow him to work or deeming him/her as restored employee, paying full emoluments/ remuneration during the period of suspension till the completion of enquiry. ( 7 ) APPLYING the general law of master and servant, a Division Bench of this Court in T. Innareddy s case (supra) observed as under:". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ( 7 ) APPLYING the general law of master and servant, a Division Bench of this Court in T. Innareddy s case (supra) observed as under:". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . but since it is the inherent right of the master to place a servant under suspension, which would mean putting him of the duties to discharge, it cannot be doubted that even apart from the scope of section 79 of the Act, the management would have the right to place the petitioner under suspension and that no statutory limitation as stipulated in section 79 (3) (a) is applicable to such suspension, but in such a case there cannot be any reduction of pay of the employee there being no authority for the same. The relationship remains animated but in abeyance would entitle the employee to receive his full wages during the period of suspension even though he is commanded by the master not to discharge the duties" (emphasis supplied) ( 8 ) IN view of the judgment of the division Bench, the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners get an automatic right of reinstatement by the management cannot be accepted. In the event of the enquiry not being started and completed, the right of the suspended delinquent employee is only to get full wages without any deduction. ( 9 ) ACCORDINGLY, these writ petitions are disposed of declaring that the petitioners shall not be deemed to be under suspension and it is for the management of the respective college/school to pass appropriate orders either reinstating them to discharge their duties or by directing them not to discharge duties and pay the monthly remuneration in full. The respondent-Management shall pass necessary order immediately within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.