IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 23276 of 2010(H)
1. P.M.VASUDEVAN, AGED 63 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. THE COMMISSIONER,
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
4. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
5. THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO
6. THE FIT PERSON,
For Petitioner :SRI.R.MANOJ
For Respondent :SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN,SC,MALABAR DEVASWOM
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :26/07/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
-------------------------
W.P.(C.) No.23276 of 2010 (H)
---------------------------------
Dated, this the 26th day of July, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is a Superintendent at Mangottukavu Sree
Bhagavathi Temple in Palakkad District. Based on Ext.P1 vigilance
report and consequential directions issued pursuant to the orders
passed by the 2nd respondent, the 4th respondent has issued Ext.P3
order dated 13/06/2010 placing the petitioner under suspension.
Against the said order, he has filed Ext.P4 before the 3rd respondent
and Ext.P5 before the 1st respondent.
2. In this writ petition, although, the petitioner has raised
several contentions against Ext.P3 order placing him under
suspension itself, still having regard to the fact that statutory
remedies have already been invoked by the petitioner, I do not think
it necessary for this Court to go into the merits of the contentions
raised.
3. Insofar as Ext.P4 is concerned, having regard to the fact
that Ext.P3 order of suspension itself refers to the directions of the
WP(C) No.23276/2010
-2-
Commissioner on the basis of which the petitioner is placed under
suspension, I do not think that any useful purpose will be served by
directing consideration of Ext.P4. However, Ext.P5, which is
pending before the 1st respondent, can be treated as a revision filed
by the petitioner under Section 99 of the Act.
4. Therefore, I direct the 1st respondent to consider and
pass orders on Ext.P5 treating the same as a revision filed by the
petitioner under Section 99 of the Act. This the 1st respondent shall
do as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within eight weeks of
production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ
petition.
The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along
with a copy of this writ petition before the 1st respondent for
compliance.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg