IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 5573 of 2008(L)
1. KASINATHAN.M., MOROTH HOUSE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI
Dated :20/02/2008
O R D E R
V.GIRI,J.
-------------------------
W.P ( C) No. 5573 of 2008
--------------------------
Dated this the 20th February, 2008
J U D G M E N T
While working as a Police Constable in the
Commissionerate of Police, Kozhikode, petitioner was convicted
for an offence under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act and was
sentenced to undergo R.I for 5 years with fine of Rs.1 lakh by the
Fast Track Court II, Kozhikode in SC 8/2003. On the basis of
such conviction, petitioner was dismissed from service, by
Exhibit P1 order passed by the 3rd respondent on the premise
that it is considered that the conduct of the petitioner which has
led to his conviction is such as to render his further retention in
public service undesirable.
2. Petitioner challenged his conviction and sentence
under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act in Crl.A. No.556 of 2005.
This Court held that the conviction under Section 55(a) is
unsustainable and accordingly set aside the same. But the
petitioner was instead convicted for the offence under Section
63 of the Abkari Act and was sentenced to pay a fine of
W.P ( C) No. 5573 of 2008
2
Rs.1,500/-.
3. Petitioner has submitted Exhibit P3 before the 3rd
respondent for reconsideration of the order by which he was
dismissed from service. In circumstances where the basis of
Exhibit P1, according to him, has been changed, this writ
petition has been filed seeking a direction to the 3rd respondent
to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exhibit P3.
4. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
Mr.T.G.Rajendran and the learned Government Pleader. In my
view, the 3rd respondent is obliged to consider his request under
Exhibit P2, since there is a change of circumstances, in as much
as that the conviction of the petitioner under Section 55(a) of the
Abkari Act has been set aside by this Court in Exhibit P2
judgment.
In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the
3rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on
Exhibit P3, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt
of a copy of this judgment.
(V.GIRI, JUDGE)
ma
W.P ( C) No. 5573 of 2008
3
K.THANKAPPAN,J
CRL.A. NO.92 OF 1999
W.P ( C) No. 5573 of 2008
4
ORDER
25th May, 2007