was not the calendar issued by the Education Department under Rule 5(4) of Chapter VII of the Rules. On proper reading of Rule 5(4) of the Rules, it would appear that it contemplates only one calendar which is issued by the Education Department. There is neither general calendar nor any Muslim calendar. Thus, the calendar issued by the Education Department under Rule 5(4) of the Rules is in accordance with the mandate of Rule 5 carrying the details and prescribing the number of public holidays, the opening day and the closing day, etc. It stipulates that in case where the majority of the students are Muslim in a particular school and if they want to avail of Ramzan holidays, the same can be availed. In such a situation, the holidays availed by them during Ramzan have to be compensated by working during midsummer holidays. This can be done after obtaining sanction from the controlling officers. The controlling officer in regard to the appellant school is the Assistant Educational Officer. Thus, we find that the learned Single Judge was not correct in holding that what was being followed in the appellant school was not the calendar issued under Rule 5(4) of the Rules. In fact, all the schools, private and public, followed only one calendar issued by the Government. Further we are unable to
