IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 35832 of 2010(D)
1. V.RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF CIVIL SUPPLIES,
3. THE COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES,
4. THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,
5. THE ADDITIONAL GENERAL MANAGER(P&A),
6. THE DIRECTOR,
For Petitioner :SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J.
For Respondent :SMT.MOLLY JACOB,SC,SUPPLYCO
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :07/01/2011
O R D E R
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
==================
W.P.(C).No.35832 of 2010
==================
Dated this the 7th day of January, 2011
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner’s grievance in this writ petition is that although the
petitioner was suspended more than a year ago, the disciplinary
proceedings pursuant to suspension have not been completed yet. At
the same time, the petitioner is continued on suspension indefinitely.
The petitioner, therefore, seeks the following reliefs:
“i) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction
or order calling for the records leading to Ext.P6 and quashing
the same.
ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ,
direction or order directing respondents 1 and 2 to reinstate the
petitioner in service forthwith.
iii) declare that the action of the respondents in not reinstating the
petitioner in service is discriminatory and violative of Article 14
of the Constitution of India.”
2. By orders dated 17.12.2010 and 3.1.2011, I directed the
learned Government Pleader to get instructions as to what proceedings
have been taken in the disciplinary proceedings initiated by suspending
the petitioner more than a year ago.
3. Today, the learned Government Pleader submits that no
further proceedings have been taken in the matter. I am of opinion
that after suspending the petitioner, the respondents have to take the
proceedings to its logical conclusion expeditiously.
4. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of
with the following directions:
w.p.c.35832/10 2
The respondents shall see that the disciplinary proceedings
initiated against the petitioner by suspending him shall be taken to its
logical conclusion, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four
months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
If, for any valid reason, the respondents are unable to complete the
proceedings within the said four months, the petitioner shall be
reinstated in service, after the expiry of the said four months, if the
respondents do not decide to revoke the suspension earlier.
Sd/-
sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
///True copy///
P.A. to Judge
