High Court Kerala High Court

Saraswathy.T.A vs State Of Kerala on 14 December, 2009

Kerala High Court
Saraswathy.T.A vs State Of Kerala on 14 December, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 35979 of 2009(N)


1. SARASWATHY.T.A, AGED 55 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF CIVIL SUPPLIES,

3. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :14/12/2009

 O R D E R
                      ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
             --------------------------------------------------
                 W.P.(C) NO.35979 OF 2009 (N)
             --------------------------------------------------
        Dated this the 14th day of December, 2009

                          J U D G M E N T

Petitioner was the Manager of a Maveli Store. On inspection,

shortage of stock was found and the petitioner was placed under

suspension. Thereafter she was reinstated in service.

2. Meanwhile, a Criminal Case was registered and she was

finally convicted by the trial court by Ext.P2 judgment. Acting

upon Ext.P2 she was dismissed from service as per Ext.P3.

3. She filed appeal against Ext.P2 as Criminal Appeal

No.598/04. By Ext.P4 judgment, the Additional Sessions Judge,

Trissur and set aside the above conviction and acquitted the

petitioner. According to the petitioner, since the dismissal was

entirely acting upon Ext.P2 judgment of conviction and in view of

Ext.P4 judgment allowing her appeal, she made Ext.P6

representation to the 2nd respondent seeking reinstatement in

service. Orders were not passed on Ext.P6 and therefore Ext.P7

reminder was also made. Even to Ext.P7 there is no response. It is

in these circumstances the writ petition is filed.

WPC.No.35979 /09
:2 :

4. If as stated by the petitioner she has filed Exts.P6 and P7

before the 2nd respondent seeking reinstatement in view of Ext.P4,

it is for the 2nd respondent to deal with the representations.

5. Taking note of the allegation that these representations

are not considered, I dispose of this writ petition directing that the

2nd respondent shall consider and pass orders on Exts.P6 and P7

referred to above, in the light of Ext.P4. This shall be done as

expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 4 weeks from the

date of production of a copy of the judgment along with a copy of

the writ petition.

Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a

copy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent for compliance.

(ANTONY DOMINIC)
JUDGE
vi/

WPC.No.35979 /09
:3 :