IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2008 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 19067 of 2007(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ C.V.VIJAYAN, SPECIAL REVENUE INSPECTOR (UNDER SUSPENSION), O/O THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), RAJAKUMARI, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVT.OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, GOVT.OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, DEVIKULAM P.O., IDUKKI. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. NANDAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 19067 of 2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A1.4/2002 DATED 14.1.2002 EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A.1088 OF 2002 EXT.P3- A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.LR (E-7) 9970/2002 DATED 11.6.03 EXT.P4- A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.21.8.03 EXT.P5- A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDIONGS NO.A1.4/2004 DATED 11.2.04 EXT.P6- A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.LR-D6/16313/05 DATED 10.8.2005 EXT.P7- A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 1.4.04 EXT.P8- A TRUE COPY OF ORDER PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN W.P.(C).32722 OF 2005 EXT.P9- A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.LR D6 – 16313/05 ON 26.12.05 EXT.P10- A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.21010/2007/LR (D)6 DATED 5.5.07 EXT.P11- A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.21010/2007/LR(D) 6 DATED 7.5.07 (TRUE COPY) P.A TO JUDGE V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).19067/2007 -------------------- Dated this the 4th day of April, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges Ext.P11 order of suspension, which relates to the petitioner and other persons. According to the petitioner, he had worked as Village Officer, Chinakanal in Udumbanchola Taluk and as a matter of fact the said stint of service had been taken note of by the Deputy Commissioner of Land Revenue on an earlier occasion as evidenced by Ext.P3. Therefore, the petitioner had been re-allotted to Idukki District. Again petitioner's suspension, on a subsequent occasion on the same set of allegations, was revoked and he was reinstated in service but allotted to Kannur District. According to the petitioner, what took place under Ext.P11 (and similar order is Ext.P10) was suspension of 21 officers and therefore, individual facts were not referred to. In my view, this is a matter which can be looked into by the Commissioner of Land Revenue and it should be done at the earliest. Apparently certain other persons who were also suspended under Exts.P10 and P11 had W.P.(C).19067/2007 2 been subsequently reinstated. Learned Government Pleader points out this is after the Commissioner was convinced that the concerned person was not involved as such, in any activities which came under scrutiny. 2. In the result, writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to move the Commissioner of Land Revenue for revocation of suspension under Rule 10(6) of the K.C.S. (C.C & A) Rules. If it is so done within ten days from today, it shall be considered and orders passed within four weeks thereafter, after hearing the petitioner. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition also along with a copy of the judgment. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs