IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 10878 of 2010(H)
1. G.SAKTHIDHARAN NAIR, AGED 52 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. S.MADHUSOODHANAN NAIR, AGED 47 YEARS,
3. M.NAZAR HANEEF, AGED 32 YEARS,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
... Respondent
2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
3. THE DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY,
For Petitioner :SRI.E.RAFEEK
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR
Dated :30/03/2010
O R D E R
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P. (C) No.10878 OF 2010
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 30th day of March, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners are working under the department
of Mining and Geology. They are holding the post of Mineral
Revenue Inspector, driver and night watcher respectively. As
per Ext.P1 order, the petitioners were placed under
suspension on 11.5.2009 pursuant to their arrest in a vigilance
raid by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and
Anti-Corruption Bureau, Alappuzha, Crime No.3/2009 has
been registered against them by the Vigilance and Anti
Corruption Bureau, Alappuzha. The petitioners have been
arrayed as accused numbers 2 to 4 therein. The grievance of
the petitioners is that though they are placed under
suspension as per order dated 16.5.2009, the order of
suspension has not, so far been, reviewed.
In the context of the contentions of the petitioners it is to
be noted that though there is a provision for filing review
under Rule 35 of Kerala Civil Services(Classification, Control
and Appeal)Rules, the petitioners have not so far approached
WPC.10878 of 2010
: 2 :
the Government by filing a review petition. At the same time,
there cannot be any reason for not reviewing the order of
suspension in terms of the provisions under Para 17 of the
manual for disciplinary proceedings. Of course that is a
provision enabling review in respect of disciplinary
proceedings initiated. In such circumstances, considering the
fact that the petitioners are placed under suspension as per
Ext.P1, the petitioners are given liberty to approach the
Government by filing a review petition as contemplated under
Rule 35 of KCS(CCA)Rules within a period of two weeks from
today. In case, such a review petition is received from the
petitioners, same shall be considered in accordance with law,
expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of two months from
the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
(C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)
jma
//true copy//
P.A to Judge
WPC.10878 of 2010
: 3 :