IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 11683 of 2009(E)
1. K.C.KUNHAMMED,AGED 55 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. DIRECTORATE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION,
... Respondent
2. PRINCIPAL,GOVERNMENT ENGINEERING
For Petitioner :SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :31/07/2009
O R D E R
T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.11683 OF 2009
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 31st day of July, 2009.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner who was working as Head Accountant in the
Government Engineering College, Wayanad was suspended from
service on various allegations like defalcation of Government
money and stipend to students. Exhibit P1 is the copy of the
order of suspension. Thereafter, as per Exhibit P2, memo of
charges were issued, which was duly replied as per Exhibit P3.
2. Exhibit P4 shows that the petitioner was directed to
attend an enquiry on 19.04.2007, and again by Exhibits P5 and
P5(a) memo of charges and statement of allegations were issued
to him. It was contended that the petitioner is innocent in the
matter. Accordingly, the petitioner sought for a direction to the
respondents to reinstate him in service.
3. Exhibit P7 is a copy of the enquiry report dated
03.03.2008. The petitioner was issued with Exhibit P8 by which
an amount of Rs.15,170/- was sought to be recovered. It is
W.P.(C) No.11683/2009 2
submitted that the said amount has been paid also. By
Exhibit P9, the petitioner sought for reinstatement in service
since the enquiry was completed. Since the enquiry report was
duly submitted, what remains is completion of disciplinary action.
The petitioner submits that the continued suspension is not
required as enquiry itself was over.
The respondents will take appropriate action to finalize the
disciplinary action against the petitioner within a period of three
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Whether the petitioner is to be reinstated in service is upto the
competent respondent to take a decision. The petitioner will be
free to challenge the contentions in Exhibit P7 enquiry report
before the authorities concerned.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
JUDGE
smp