IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 17309 of 2009(G)
1. P.GIREESH KUMAR, AGED 40 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SECRETARY,
... Respondent
2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER,
For Petitioner :SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY
For Respondent :SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP,SC,COCHIN D.B
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :16/07/2009
O R D E R
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
W.P.(C) Nos. 17309 and 18665 of 2009
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dated this the 16th day of July, 2009
JUDGMENT
Common questions arise in these writ petitions. They were
therefore heard together and are being disposed of by this common
judgment.
2. The petitioners are the employees of the Cochin Devaswom
Board. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 17309 of 2009 is the Devaswom
Officer of Annamanada Devaswom and the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.
18665 of 2009 is Masappady of Chirangara Devaswom. They were placed
under suspension by order dated 31-10-2008 issued by the Secretary of
the Cochin Devaswom Board. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 186665 of
2009 was placed under suspension along with others on the ground that
they had committed theft of money after breaking open the
“bhandaram”. The complaint against the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 17309
of 2009 is that though he had witnessed the offence being committed, he
did not prevent the miscreants from committing theft of money.
3. Sri.K.Gopalakrishna Kurup, the learned standing counsel for
the respondents submits that pursuant to the order of suspension, the
memo of charges is being framed and that it will be served on the
petitioners and disciplinary action will be finalized expeditiously. He
W.P.(C) No. 17309/09 and con. case 2
submits that the charges levelled against the petitioners are very serious
in nature and they cannot be reinstated in service before the enquiry is
completed.
4. The orders impugned in these writ petitions disclose very
serious acts of misconduct. Therefore, it cannot be said that the
respondents were not justified in placing the petitioners under
suspension. However, as seven months have passed after the petitioners
were placed under suspension, I am of the opinion that the Cochin
Devaswom Board should consider whether the petitioners should
continue under suspension.
I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with a direction that in
the event of the petitioners filing appropriate individual representations
before the Special Devaswom Commissioner who is presently discharging
the functions of the Cochin Devaswom Board, the Special Devaswom
Commissioner shall consider the same and pass orders therein within six
weeks from the date on which the petitioners submit such
representations. If the petitioners file the representations after the
Cochin Devaswom Board is re-constituted, the Special Commissioner
shall forward the same to the Cochin Devaswom Board. The Cochin
Devaswom Board/Special Commissioner shall after final orders are
passed communicate the decision taken on the representations to the
W.P.(C) No. 17309/09 and con. case 3
petitioners expeditiously. The contentions of the petitioners on the
merits are kept open.
The writ petitions are disposed of as above. No costs.
P.N.RAVINDRAN,
JUDGE.
mn.