IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD FEBRUARY 2011 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 399 of 2011(Y) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- C.R.SASIKUMAR, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.C.T.RAGHAVAN, VILLAGE OFFICER, NO.23, THRISSUR (UNDER SUSPENSION) RESIDING AT CHITTATTUKARA HOUSE, M.G.KAVU P.O., THRISSUR-680 581. BY SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE BY ADV. SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI SRI.RAHUL VENUGOPAL RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR-680 003. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 399 of 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is presently serving as the Village Officer, Thrissur. The petitioner has been suspended by the District Collector, Thrissur on certain allegations of misconduct which, according to the petitioner, has no basis whatsoever and he has only been obeying the directions of his superiors. He further submits that the suspension was as per the directions of the Minister for Revenue as is clear from the references in the order of suspension itself. Petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs:- “i) To call for the records leading upto Exhibit P5 and quash the same by issuance of a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction. ii) To declare that the order of suspension is wholly void, inoperative, unenforceable and violative of Articles 14, 16, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. iii) To issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the 1st respondent from effecting the order of suspension irrespective of the issuance of Exhibit P5 and instead to continue the petitioner in service as Village Officer, Thrissur.” 2. A statement has been filed on behalf of the first respondent in paragraph 5 and 7 of which, it is stated thus. “5. In the above circumstances, Senior Superintendent (I & A) Collectorate, Thrissur conducted a preliminary enquiry and has submitted W.P.(C)No.399 of 2011 -2- the report. In that report, it has been mentioned that the Additional Tahsildar, Thrissur had directed the petitioner on 08.03.2010 regarding the acceptance of land tax may be taken only after ascertaining the actual ownership of the land and subject to the decision of Court. The Village officer, Thrissur was also directed to verify about the status of the case from the TUDA. It has also been mentioned in the enquiry report that the Village Officer, Thrissur had not seen submitted the report called for by the Additional Tahsildar, Thrissur.” xx xx xx xx “7. Even though the village officer, Thrissur was convinced himself from the existing village records that there was no such sub division No:132/2A in Thrissur village, he himself accepted the land tax and executed the Transfer of Registry of land in Survey No:132/2A without responding to the directions and the report called for from the Additional Tahsildar, Thrissur. Thus prima-facie it is satisfied that there are serious lapses amounting to culpable negligence, insubordination of the orders of his superiors and there by causing huge loss to the State. It is also seen that the Village Officer has acted in a hasty manner and with a malafide intention. In the above circumstances, it is satisfied that permitting to continue Sri.C.R.Sasikumar as village officer will be against the public interest and will affect the transparency of further enquiry. Thus he has been suspended from service pending enquiry, as per Rule 10 (1) (a) of the Kerala Civil Service (Classification, control & Appeal), rules, 1960 vide proceedings No: SSI-9/2011 (1) dated 03.01.2011 by the District Collector, Thrissur.” Counsel for the petitioner would vehemently contend that those allegations are without any basis whatsoever. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. I am not inclined to go into the truth of the allegations now, insofar as that is a matter for evidence and if I enter a finding on the same now, it would affect the enquiry proceedings themselves. In view of the allegations as contained in the statement, I am not inclined to interefere with the order W.P.(C)No.399 of 2011 -3- of suspension at this point of time. But, I feel that the respondents should complete the disciplinary proceedings initiated by suspending the petitioner, expeditiously. Accordingly, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to see that the disciplinary proceedings initiated by suspending the petitioner is completed and taken to its logical conclusion, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE KRK