High Court Kerala High Court

P.Abdul Khader vs The Executive Engineer on 19 August, 2008

Kerala High Court
P.Abdul Khader vs The Executive Engineer on 19 August, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 24901 of 2008(M)


1. P.ABDUL KHADER, S/O.ASSAINAR, LINEMAN
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. CHIEF ENGINEER(HRM), VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM,

3. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.SHRIHARI RAO

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN

 Dated :19/08/2008

 O R D E R
                     P.N.RAVINDRAN,J.
                     -------------------------
                 W.P ( C) No.24901 of 2008
                     --------------------------
             Dated this the 19th August, 2008

                       J U D G M E N T

By Exhibit-P1 order dated 27.2.2007, the petitioner

was placed under suspension on the allegation that he had

demanded and accepted bribe from a consumer.

Pursuant to Exhibit-P1, a memo of charges was issued and

the petitioner submitted his written statement of defence.

It is submitted that there has been no progress in the

enquiry thereafter. The petitioner submits that in Exhibit

P4, he has sought a review of suspension and

reinstatement in service. It is submitted that based on

Exhibit-P4, the Executive Engineer sent Exhibit-P5 letter

to the Chief Engineer, the second respondent herein.

The petitioner has ,in this writ petition, inter alia prayed

that having regard to the fact that he is continuing under

suspension since 27.2.2007, the second respondent may

be directed to consider Exhibit-P4 and pass orders

thereon having regard to the contents of Exhibit-P5 letter.

W.P ( C) No.24901 of 2008
2

I have heard Sri.K.Shri.Hari Rao, the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner and Sri.K.S. Anil, the learned

standing counsel appearing for the respondents. As the

petitioner is continuing under suspension from 27.2.2007

and as no progress has been made in the disciplinary

enquiry initiated as per Exhibit-P2, it is only proper that

the request made by the petitioner in Exhibit-P4 is

considered by the second respondent.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing

the second respondent to consider Exhibit-P4 in the light of

Exhibit-P5 and take a decision thereon. This shall be done

within a period of two months from the date on which the

petitioner produces a copy of this judgment. The petitioner

shall also be heard before orders are passed on Exhibit-P5.

(P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE)
ma

W.P ( C) No.24901 of 2008
3

W.P ( C) No.24901 of 2008
4