M.S.Chandravally vs Deputy Secretary on 17 February, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA.No. 369 of 2009()


1. M.S.CHANDRAVALLY, AGED 54 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. DEPUTY SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT,
                       ...       Respondent

2. DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF PANCHAYATH,

3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE

4. SECRETARY, PULINKUNNU GRAMA PANCHAYATH,

5. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.MATHEW JAMES

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN

 Dated :17/02/2009

 O R D E R
      KURIAN JOSEPH & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ.
              ----------------------------------------------
                      W.A. No.369 of 2009
              ----------------------------------------------
                  Dated 17th February, 2009.

                          J U D G M E N T

Kurian Joseph, J.

Appellant is the writ petitioner. The writ petition was

filed challenging Ext.P1 order of suspension. According to the

petitioner, the suspension is totally without any justification.

Some of the relevant materials to substantiate her contentions

are produced in the writ petition as well as in the writ appeal.

Once the order of suspension is issued, Rule 10(6) of the Kerala

Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules provides

for an opportunity to the incumbent concerned to seek a review

of the order, and apparently as per Ext.P5, the petitioner has

resorted to such remedy. There was also a prayer in the writ

petition to consider Ext.P5. Learned Single Judge disposed of the

writ petition with a direction to pass orders on Ext.P5 within two

months. The petitioner submits that this court should have

WA NO.369/09 2

interfered with the suspension since there is no material available

for the additional 5th respondent to place the petitioner under

suspension. So long as the rules provide for an opportunity for

the incumbent concerned to approach the authority which placed

him under suspension, to bring such materials before the said

authority so as to revoke the suspension, the court is fully

justified in issuing such a direction to pass orders on the review

petition. All the materials produced by the petitioner are to be

produced by him before the additional 5th respondent, the

authority who placed him under suspension. Learned

Government Pleader submits that in case those materials are

produced by the petitioner before the additional 5th respondent

and in case he appears before the additional 5th respondent,

orders can be passed expeditiously, after hearing the petitioner.

In the above circumstances, the writ appeal is disposed of as

follows :-

The petitioner may present herself before the

additional 5th respondent with all the relevant materials, on

27.2.2009. The additional 5th respondent shall afford an

WA NO.369/09 3

opportunity for hearing to the petitioner and thereafter pass

orders on Ext.P5 within another three weeks.

KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE.

tgs

KURIAN JOSEPH &

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ

———————————————-

W.A. No.369 of 2009

———————————————-

J U D G M E N T

Dated 17th February, 2009.