of the local body. The first possibility is of his direct involvement in the mischief and the second possibility is of signing the correspondence prepared by the Headmistress blindly, without verification. In any case, the correspondence was required to be drafted and prepared by the Headmistress in view of the nature of duties of the Headmistress. In view of these circumstances, initially show case notice was issued to the Headmistress and she was asked to explain as to why the amount already paid to the petitioner of other proceeding should not be recovered from her and action should not be taken against her. This show cause notice was replied by the Headmistress on 8-9-2006 and she only contended that whatever correspondence was made by her was made through the Administrative Officer. The Administrative Officer came to the conclusion that the Headmistress had intentionally included third division in the correspondence received from the Education Department and he fixed the responsibility on her in respect of the loss sustained by the school. Due to that she was directed to make good the loss, to make the payment of the said amount. Under service rules such order can be made and the amount,
