Loading...

A.H.Govindan vs State Of Kerala on 16 October, 2006

Kerala High Court
A.H.Govindan vs State Of Kerala on 16 October, 2006
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP No. 13305 of 2001(H)



1. A.H.GOVINDAN
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH

 Dated :16/10/2006

 O R D E R
                            KURIAN JOSEPH, J.
                 ----------------------------------------------
                         O.P.No.13305 of  2001
                 ----------------------------------------------
                      Dated 16th October,  2006.

                              J U D G M E N T

Petitioner is aggrieved by Exts.P8 and P13 orders. The

issue pertains to the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the

petitioner culminating in removal from service on the ground of

unauthorised absence. It is not in dispute that the petitioner did

not join duty after the permitted leave period. Requests for

extension also were turned down and yet the petitioner, who was

working as Head Nurse in Medical College Hospital at the relevant

time did not join duty. It is also seen from the impugned orders

that all the possible formalities have been complied with while

passing the orders. Therefore, the orders do not suffer from any

illegality or irregularity. There is no error also on facts. The writ

petition is hence liable to be dismissed. The only contention of

the petitioner is that in similar circumstances, in the case of one

Smt.M.Chandramathy, the Government itself had passed orders

altering the punishment. Nothing is available on record as to the

facts and circumstances in which the Government passed Ext.P14

order. Moreover, it is now settled law that merely because a

OP NO.13305/01 2

special order is passed which is apparently impermissible, there

cannot be a direction to repeat the same mistake. Still further it

is seen that in the case of the wife of the petitioner, on

humanitarian grounds, the punishment of removal from service

has been reduced to compulsory retirement. In such

circumstances, on equity also, the petitioner is not entitled for the

relief. The writ petition is hence dismissed.

KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.

tgs

KURIAN JOSEPH, J

———————————————-

O.P.No. 13305 of 2001 H

———————————————-

J U D G M E N T

Dated 16th October, 2006.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information