IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 1018 of 2008()
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Petitioner
2. THE SPECIAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
3. THE SUPERINTENDENT, MEDICAL COLLEGES
Vs
1. DR.SUGANTHI DAVID, W/O.JOY JACOD
... Respondent
For Petitioner :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :28/05/2008
O R D E R
J.B. Koshy & P.N.Ravindran, JJ.
————————————–
W.A. No. 1018 of 2008
—————————————
Dated this the 28th day of May, 2008
Judgment
Koshy,J.
Writ petitioner in this case is an Associate Professor in
the Department of Orthopaedics in the Medical College Hospital,
Thiruvananthapuram. She was suspended pending enquiry on the
contention that there was inaction in transferring a detenu under
the Kerala Anti-social Activity (Prevention) Ordinance to the cell
intended for detenus inspite of intimation having been given about
the order of the District Magistrate for detention of the detenu under
the said Ordinance. In support of the above, respondents produced
Ext.R3 (a) to show that the matter was informed to her. Contention
of the petitioner as stated at paragraph 3 of the judgment was that
Ext.R3 (a) was not served on her and what was served was
something else and she has signed only second page. But, we have
verified with the files. The second page is written on the reverse of
the front page and there is continuity. But, last line in the front
page was not legible in the photostat copy produced as Ext.R3 (a).
It shows the signature of the petitioner. Ext.R3 (a) was received by
W.A.No. 1018/2008 2
the appellant. But, by that alone, it cannot be stated there was
purposeful inaction on the part of the appellant in not transferring
the detenu. The learned Judge in the impugned judgment only
directed to withdraw the suspension and continue the disciplinary
action. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that she
was already transferred from the Medical College
Hospital,Thiruvananthapuram. It is not necessary in all cases of
disciplinary matters that parties should be suspended. Since the
learned single Judge has only allowed to continue the disciplinary
action, we are of the opinion that no interference is required in the
operative portion of the judgment. The disciplinary proceedings
shall be continued according to law without suspension
untrammelled by the observations in the judgment of the learned
single Judge or in this judgment.
The writ appeal is disposed of accordingly .
J.B.Koshy
Judge
P.N.Ravindran
Judge
vaa
W.A.No. 1018/2008 3
J.B. KOSHY
AND
P.N.RAVINDRAN,JJ.
————————————-
W.A. No. 1018 of 2008
————————————-
Judgment
Dated:28th May, 2008