IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 6TH MARCH 2009 / 15TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 7236 of 2009(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- S.SARAF, COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (UNDER SUSPENSION) FORMERLY CTO, ATTINGAL (DARUL BARKETH TC 20/1673, OPPOSITE CHELSA HOSPITAL, KARAMANA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 002. BY ADV. SRI.VIJAYAN. K.U. SRI.K.N.SREEKUMARAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. COMMISSIONER & CONVENOR, (DPC LOWER FOR COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDINGS, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SECRETARY TAXES & CONVENOR (DPC HIGHER) FOR COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. JEPSON K.J., INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST, MANJESWARAM, KASARGOD. 4. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (KERALA) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 7236 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 6th March,2009 J U D G M E N T The main challenge in the writ petition is against the order of suspension passed by the Commissioner, Department of Commercial Taxes, Thiruvananthapuram, which order is produced as Exhibit-P3. The suspension was ordered pending detailed enquiry and disciplinary action. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a reading of Exhibit-P3 will show that there are no allegations of mis-conduct against the petitioner in performing his official duties and it was ordered only to deny the promotional avenues of the petitioner just before the convening of the DPC. 3. In Exhibit-P1 seniority list, petitioner's serial number is 480 and 3rd respondent's serial number is 481. In Exhibit-P2 select list, petitioner's serial number is 13 and he was expecting promotion to the cadre of Assistant Commissioner. Immediately after Exhibit-P2 select list was published, he was placed under suspension as per W.P ( C) No. 7236 of 2009 2 Exhibit-P3. Seeking to revoke his suspension, he filed Exhibit-P4 representation . Even without taking any action in the above representation , by Exhibit-P5 so many juniors have been promoted. Exhibit-P6 is a representation submitted by the petitioner's father before the Hon'ble Minister of Finance seeking to redress his grievances in the matter. 4. The petitioner has already approached the 1st respondent to revoke the order of suspension. The suspension is ordered as early as on 14.3.2008 and almost one year has gone thereafter, without any further action at all. It is pointed out that no memo of charges has been issued also. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibit-P4 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of six weeks form the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Depending upon the outcome of the order, the claim raised by the petitioner will also be considered. (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 7236 of 2009 3 W.P ( C) No. 7236 of 2009 4