IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 913 of 2010(L)
1. K.K.MOHANDAS, AGED 53 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER,
... Respondent
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM.
3. THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA REP. BY
For Petitioner :SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN
Dated :12/01/2010
O R D E R
K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
------------------------------------------------------------
W.P(C) NO: 913 OF 2010 L
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th January, 2010.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a Tahsildar in the Revenue Department. He
was placed under suspension by Ext.P1 order. As per Ext.P4
proceedings, his suspension was reviewed and the same has been
set aside. Accordingly, the petitioner has been reinstated in
service. Initially he was posted as Special Tahsildar (LA) N.H.I,
Kakkanad, in an existing vacancy. By Ext.P7 he has been
transferred and posted to Kannur district. The petitioner is
aggrieved by his transfer and posting as per Ext.P7. The petitioner
also complaint that the period of his suspension has not been
regularised.
2. According to the counsel for the petitioner, Ext.P7 transfer
refers to Ext.P4 proceedings and the order transferring him to
Kannur has been issued on the premise that he has been posted to
Kannur as per the order reinstating him. A reading of Ext.P7 does
not warrant any such conclusion. Ext.P7 only states that he has
been reinstated and that he is thereafter posted to Kannur. It is
true that he has been permitted to join duty as per Ext.P5. That
does not preclude the authorities from ordering his transfer as per
WPC 913/2010 2
Ext.P6. I do not find any ground to interfere with Ext.P7 order of
transfer.
3. The petitioner has also a complaint that the period of his
suspension has not been regularised, though he has been
reinstated in service. Accordingly the first respondent is directed to
regularise the period of suspension of the petitioner and to pass
appropriate orders in this regard within a period of three weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to
mention that the petitioner would also be entitled to the monetary
benefits consequent to such regularisation. The writ petition is
disposed of with the above direction.
K. SURENDRA MOHAN
Judge
jj
WPC 913/2010 3
K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ.
—————————————————-
M.F.A.NO:
—————————————————–
JUDGMENT
Dated: